The backstory. In May, attorney and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz sued Netflix for $80m over his portrayal in Filthy Rich, arguing he was hoodwinked into appearing in the series. He also claims Netflix defamed him by falsely asserting that he sexually assaulted Virginia Giuffre - one of Epstein’s many victims.
In a flurry of filings last week, Netflix and a rolodex of producers
slammed Dershowitz’s claims, flipping the script by filing a countersuit that contends:
First
“Filthy Rich was never intended to, and did not in fact, focus on Dershowitz or provide a platform for a one-sided exoneration of him.“
Second
Dershowitz tried to manipulate his interaction with producers from the outset.
- “Even before Filthy Rich was released, Dershowitz made clear that he would sue over his portrayal in the Series unless his story was told in the exact manner he wanted. And when he realized that Filthy Rich would not be used as a vehicle to tell only his side of the story, he brought this current lawsuit seeking to suppress the Defendants’ speech on matters of public concern.”
Third
Filthy Rich accurately reported on the ongoing Giuffre Litigation and Giuffre’s other public court filings.
THE TAKEAWAY
Given Dershowitz’s slimy career history (representing Epstein, Trump, Claus von Bülow, Mike Tyson etc.), using litigation to try and shut Netflix up seems true to character.
But Netflix’s counterclaim is pretty solid - you can read the whole thing
here - and relies heavily on anti-SLAPP laws designed to, well, slap down strategic lawsuits whose sole aim is to intimidate or censor the opposing party.
All this to say… Dershowitz probably should’ve let sleeping dogs lie.
