I don’t know about this, Penguin. I think they have to prove it’s the sole or predominant cause of the loss of income for that bit to apply.

And that presents a legal quandary. He’s under contract which is protected by privacy if not mistaken. I don’t know if it could be presented as evidence in this matter. That contract would.be the deciding factor.

Disney and Nike are probably the two (American) companies most notorious for protecting their image. Their contracts have always had language in them to protect to protect the integrity of their name. You cannot embarrass the company. That’s true from the highest paid actors all the way down to the lowliest Disney park grounds sweeper. My ex worked at Disneyland years ago as a teenager during the summers, so I know a little bit about this.

Anyway, Disney took a big hit to it’s image due to so many of the former Disney kids falling apart once they hit adulthood. The drugs and the ODs and the deaths made the public really question how good Disney was for their kids.

So Disney changed their policy around drugs, including that contract language about embarrassing Disney being a breach of contract.

I do not know what that language is. I’ve heard rumors. I’m confident that it exists and that it is likely part of Depp’s contract.

It’s also been known for a while that he causes problems on set and that costs them money. These are hundred million dollar productions. Cast and crew are not allowed to dick around endlessly with hundred of millions of dollars of invest-or/ed money. On the end, its a business andnbusinesses have to make money. The Golden days of the diva throwing a tantrum in a drug fueled rage because there was a green jelly bean and trashing the place are over. There’s too much at stake.

At any rate, if it could be shown that he had been given a last warning or that what breached the contract wasn’t what was in the op-ed but maybe some of his published response to it on social media or bad press that was coincidentally after the article, then by legalities, the article did not cost him income. His breaching his contract did.

I’m not really keeping up with the trial, per se. I’m more interested in what people are saying about it. I’m as much of a rubber necker as the next person, I reckon. Does anyone know if the Disney contract will be evidence? Was it part of discovery? Has someone from Disney HR been asked or subpoenaed to testify?

Or are we all just happy with assuming it was completely all on the op-ed? 100%?

I think if I were Heard’s lawyers I would go after this hard, as hard as proving the abuse happened, provided I’m correct in my assessment here and it’s legally possible. I think you’re right. He’s going for MAD, this is revenge. He’s out to ruin her. Thr best way to protect her from the narrative he’s promoting is to substantially show he lost Jack Sparrow because of his own actions, not hers. Right now, nobody cares that he abused her and that some of what he did qualifies as rape. They care that someone they idolized was “ruined” by an incomplete truth. He is completely innocent in their minds.