Bidbay.com v. Bruce Spry Jr. [1]

Internet auction website Bidbay.com and its president and CEO, George Tannous, sued Bruce Spry Jr. and two of its competitors for libel, intentional interference with prospective business advantage, unfair business practices, invasion of privacy, and disparagement in California state court.  According to a court opinion in the case [2], Spry allegedly made statements under various psuedonyms in forums and chat rooms stating that Bidbay.com sold child pornography and that Tannous failed to file or pay income taxes. Separately, the complaint alleged that Bidbay's competitor Auctioncow and its affiliate Mootropolis had conspired to drive Bidbay out of business through a defamation campaign.

Spry denied that he made the offending comments and moved to dismiss the case under California's anti-SLAPP statute [3]. The court denied the motion, ruling that because Spry denied having made the defamatory comments, he could not have been engaged in an act in furtherance of his right of free speech.

Spry appealed [4] the lower court's ruling to the California Court of Appeals, arguing that he was not required to admit making the statements in question in order to bring an anti-SLAPP motion. The court of appeals affirmed [2] the lower court's decision, albeit on different grounds.  It concluded that Bidbay.com had submitted sufficient evidence supporting its claim to overcome the motion to strike. The appeals court then remanded the case back to the trial court.

The CMLP has not been able to determine what happened after the case returned to the trial court.