On Monday, the CAA filed additional claims in their ongoing lawsuit against a competing company, claiming that some of its ex-employees, who departed to establish Range Media Partners in 2020, unlawfully accessed CAA’s databases and took confidential information as they left, which is considered a breach of trade secrets.
Back in the fall, I found myself filing a lawsuit against Range, alleging their business was founded on deceit and betrayal. In an updated complaint submitted this week, I’ve disclosed that further investigation through the discovery process has uncovered compelling evidence – documents, photographs, and video footage – which serves to underscore the extent of Range’s dishonesty.
Mick Sullivan, former employee at CAA, is being sued for allegedly sending himself summaries of client meetings and project updates, known as “rundowns,” after he helped establish the company Range. One of these clients reportedly departed from CAA upon the creation of Range.
In this revised sentence, I’ve aimed to maintain the original meaning while making it more approachable and easy to understand for readers.
It’s additionally claimed that Sullivan forwarded numerous meeting summaries containing details on around 200 projects for various CAA clients to himself. Moreover, he reportedly urged a CAA assistant to provide him with further client-related information such as approximately 200 script lists they had received.
As a movie enthusiast, I found myself in a peculiar situation when I discovered that my colleagues at Range allegedly resorted to unscrupulous means to get their hands on confidential information. This included applying undue pressure on employees who remained at CAA. A former assistant at CAA, now a manager at Range named Paige Wandling, is accused of employing an inside source – a so-called mole within CAA – to gather hundreds of sensitive documents.
For several weeks, Wandling repeatedly asked, and Employee-1 supplied, confidential data from CAA on numerous occasions,” the lawsuit claims. “The data taken encompassed various types of information such as internal emails from CAA, details about film and TV prospects for talent, scripts, contacts within the industry, CAA memos, CAA schedules, and insights into CAA meetings and business strategies.
The complaint states that Wandling proposed to compensate a CAA source for this specific data, and indeed followed through on that offer.
The argument posits that the trade secrets of CAA are crucial for the operation of both the company and the entire industry. Agents amass data from film studios, producers, directors, and writers, which they store in a database for internal organization and distribution. Moreover, agents accumulate confidential information about their clients, such as financial details, personal objectives, and so forth.
The information about this client is extremely important because it reveals the unique requirements, desires, and bargaining strategies of CAA’s clients, which could be exploited by competitors,” the claim notes.
In the autumn, CAA first filed a lawsuit, alleging that Range was engaging in unethical competition. The accusation was based on the claim that Range deliberately structured its operations as a management company in order to circumvent California’s talent agency regulations.
In simpler terms, they are disputing the validity of that particular suit due to legal flaws. The revised court case still includes the original charges but also introduces new allegations such as theft of confidential business information and illegal access to computer systems.
Read More
2025-06-10 05:16