General Star Wars News

[Chi84]

Which is why I always thought her case was weak.

Disney was fully within their rights to drop her for expressing political views while not doing the same with others. That might make them look like hypocrites to some, but that doesn't make it illegal.

Personally, I couldn't care less about most of what she posted, people often say dumb things online, often unintentionally, but she kept doubling down and it got pretty gross.

I believe the case was entirely a state matter. I posted a summary of the counts earlier at some point but I don’t remember where.

 

[erasure fan1]

Not really, it was a settlement, not an admission of guilt on either side. And as of now there is no statement on her "return" to her former role. Just the normal boilerplate PR response of "we look forward to working with her on a future project".

Sure, legally that's true. I think Disney knew they were going to lose so they settled. Just as I thought would happen. When anyone settles anything, most people think that implies whoever is guilty. And I completely agree. So in reality, this wasn't so cut and dry as I was told. As I said before, if Disney kept their yap shut, ended season 2 of mando and just moved on from there. No issues. But that's not what they did.

The rest see why Disney was wrong in there handling of the situation. And before the usual suspects bounce back with their usual responses. It's not supporting what Gina said. It's the hypocrisy in their handling of it.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

The hypocrisy argument is weak because they gave her many chances concerning the things she was saying. She was willing to listen and adjust and Disney was willing to allow her that opportunity.

At some point she simply went too far and things got to the point that the association with her would be damaging to the brand.

 

[mysto]

All good points, but will she finally let me take her out? No.

Nothingburger.

 

[erasure fan1]

Again not really, its a settlement. Settlement doesn't mean they thought they were going to lose. It means they weighed the costs of trying to win against any potential fallout that would have come from it and decided the potential fallout would be worse. For example, and to try to not to get too political, say they continued to fight this and won. At what point do they have to go up against the Administration trying to get involved and cause all sorts of other problems for Disney. So the whole point is to try to minimize exposure to future battles, its a smart business move and what they've been trying to do since this Administration won the election.

I'd say settling, when they know they didn't do anything wrong, opens them up to more problems in the future, than sticking it out and winning. Unless they aren't convinced they'd win. They tried to get this thrown out but it kept moving forward. I know like some others you can't see what the issue is because that would go against a narrative. But it's ok to acknowledge Disney might have screwed this up.

Also unless some future announcement comes its not like she is getting this role back anyways. Mando and Grogu has already wrapped filming, so unless they do some some quick cameo of her walking in a meaningless background scene she is not getting screen time in that movie. And there will be no season 4 that includes that character since the movie basically replaces season 4. So unless they revive that Squadron movie she isn't returning there either. So yeah, its a hollow victory.

Agreed. I don't think she'd even accept a job at this point from this clown show at Disney/lucasfilm. But a hollow victory I don't agree with.

So its a settlement, nothing more.

Again, legally, yes. But for a whole lot of people this is just Disney buying their way out of trouble. It's an admission of guilt in many many people's eyes.

 

[Disney Irish]

I'd say settling, when they know they didn't do anything wrong, opens them up to more problems in the future, than sticking it out and winning. Unless they aren't convinced they'd win. They tried to get this thrown out but it kept moving forward. I know like some others you can't see what the issue is because that would go against a narrative. But it's ok to acknowledge Disney might have screwed this up.

What "problems" in the future? Its not like this is the first time Disney has settled a case. And no other "problems" happened with those settlements. So not sure what you think these future "problems" would be.

Also this idea that you only settle when you think you can't win is flawed thinking. Settlements happen for all sorts of reasons not directly tied to the outcome of the case. Sometimes its just easier to settle and get a quick outcome then it is to drag things out in court for years or decades.

I'll acknowledge Disney screwed up when I feel they screwed up. Nothing about this whole situation do I think they "screwed up".

Agreed. I don't think she'd even accept a job at this point from this clown show at Disney/lucasfilm. But a hollow victory I don't agree with.

If you don't think she'd show up tomorrow on set if they revived the Squadron movie you're fooling yourself. If for nothing else bragging rights.

Its a hollow victory because other than a few tweets she didn't "gain" anything. She wasn't a good actress before all this, and she won't be a good actress after this. She'll continue to get bit parts and that is where she will stay, a leading actress she will not become due to this outcome. So yeah its a hollow victory.

Again, legally, yes. But for a whole lot of people this is just Disney buying their way out of trouble. It's an admission of guilt in many many people's eyes.

Does it really matter in the end what people think? As people were going to believe what they were going to believe no matter whether Disney won or not. The court of public opinion had already decided the outcome of this long before a lawsuit was even filed.

 

[easyrowrdw]

I'd say settling, when they know they didn't do anything wrong, opens them up to more problems in the future, than sticking it out and winning. Unless they aren't convinced they'd win. They tried to get this thrown out but it kept moving forward. I know like some others you can't see what the issue is because that would go against a narrative. But it's ok to acknowledge Disney might have screwed this up.

Wasn’t Disney known for not settling many lawsuits? I feel like they had that reputation for a long time. I wonder if their stance has changed or if this case seemed more precarious. As others said, the state laws seemed to be more of a question than the federal ones.

 

[LittleBuford]

Wasn’t Disney known for not settling many lawsuits? I feel like they had that reputation for a long time. I wonder if their stance has changed or if this case seemed more precarious. As others said, the state laws seemed to be more of a question than the federal ones.

I searched for results from before 2020, and there seem to be plenty of examples, though I’d never heard of any of them.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Except they can discriminate based on personal opinions.

There is no federal law that protects speech of employees from their employer. Federal laws only protect citizens political speech from the government with some additional protection for federal employees from discrimination based on political affiliation. Of course, that protection only exists if the powers that be choose to actually abide by and enforce those laws.

Now I know California has some additional state level laws that could come into play here, but my guess is this was settled largely for the same reasons as all the other recent settlements in media, Disney would rather pay money than bring any unwanted attention from DC.

Oh I know that…

An actor can be fired “with cause”
For any reason…like eating a snickers bar.

Dog eat the pooch in Hollywood.

I’m guessing Disney just laid a rather small fee to get an nda and move on. They don’t want anything coming up for their movie next year…which is almost the ONLY Star Wars thing they have going.
Which is ridiculous

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Which is why I always thought her case was weak.

Disney was fully within their rights to drop her for expressing political views while not doing the same with others. That might make them look like hypocrites to some, but that doesn't make it illegal.

Personally, I couldn't care less about most of what she posted, people often say dumb things online, often unintentionally, but she kept doubling down and it got pretty gross.

I’m more offended she said stupid things than she “won” her wrongful termination (or whatever?) suit.

Actually I’m glad she won…more light on an awful studio…

But I don’t support abstract stupidity.

 

[easyrowrdw]

I searched for results from before 2020, and there seem to be plenty of examples, though I’d never heard of any of them.

Thanks!

I think it was during lawsuits over the disability passes, a lot of folks talking about how Disney wouldn’t/didn’t settle. Maybe they overstated it

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Disney…like any big company…has been sued like a zillion times for umpteen reasons

I’m sure they’re have been so many settlements that never make the news and it’s been that way forever

 

[LittleBuford]

Look, it's really very simple. They both said dumb things. I don't care what party each side with. If I'm going to call out Gina for what she said, I'm obligated to call out Pedro or Zegler for what they said. We should all be able to put aside party lines and call out wrong. And when people shame one and then have every excuse for the other, it's just a sad state we're in.

I believe we’re all in agreement that their statements were inappropriate. But two of them walked back their statements under pressure from Disney, whereas the third exercised her right not to.

 

[Disney Irish]

You can believe whatever you want, but everything about this case changed after Disney lost the discovery ruling in April. The company's lawyers weren't the least bit interested in a settlement before then.

Without any inside knowledge its still just an assumption on your part. And I assume you have no inside knowledge on the legal strategies of Disney's lawyers involved in this case. Unless of course you're claiming to be a Disney lawyer involved with this case, in which case I'm sure many here would have LOTS of questions for you.

Examples have been provided here for recent similar cases where companies settled even if they had what appeared to be a slam dunk case they could win. Settlements happen for all sorts of reasons separate from the potential outcome of the case or a particular procedural ruling.

 

[Hawkeye_2018]

She can’t act. The character had potential but they really didn’t do anything interesting with it.

 

[Phroobar]

Now we'll never get that new Tomorrowland.

 

[Disney Irish]

View attachment 876728

Now we'll never get that new Tomorrowland.

You’re probably 3-4 bags too many there. This wouldn’t be as big as payday as many think it is. My guess is she probably got as much as she would have gotten for that Ranger series plus legal fees, max $10M is my guess.

 

[Phroobar]

You’re probably 3-4 bags too many there. This wouldn’t be as big as payday as many think it is. My guess is she probably got as much as she would have gotten for that Ranger series plus legal fees, max $10M is my guess.

Maybe it's in $10s and $20s?

 

[Willmark]

Wisest plan for Disney.

I’m guessing that discovery was none too flattering to them which is why they fought it tooth and nail.

Both sides get what they wanted and they move on.

 

[Tha Realest]

She can’t act. The character had potential but they really didn’t do anything interesting with it.

Bad acting is sort of a Star Wars thing.