March 2017

Chinese telecommunications giant ZTE Corp has agreed to pay $892 million and plead guilty to violating US sanctions on Iran and obstructing a federal investigation, ending a five-year probe that has raised trade tensions between the US and China. The penalties, among the largest ever in a sanctions case, were imposed on ZTE for a six-year-long plan to obtain technology products from the US, incorporate them into ZTE equipment and ultimately ship the equipment to Iran, US officials said.

Still, the company avoided a more devastating outcome: a supply cutoff of US components, which the Commerce Department slapped on ZTE in March 2016, prompting the company to come forward to negotiate the eventual settlement, according to US authorities. The Commerce Department suspended the sanctions during the talks and, in conjunction with the settlement agreement, it will now move to fully remove them, officials said. Without key components such as Qualcomm Inc. processors for its smartphones, ZTE’s ability to produce some of its major products could have been crippled in a matter of months, putting it at risk of bankruptcy.

[Commentary] Today, the biggest threat to artistic freedom in the United States comes not from the heavy hand of government censorship, but instead from individuals, unhappy with the way they are portrayed — or believe they are being portrayed– on the big and small screen. They file lawsuits against studios, writers, and directors — seeking large sums of money and even court orders barring distribution of a motion picture or television program. Though rarely successful, these lawsuits threaten to chill free speech, by discouraging creators from tackling sensitive real-life subjects and diverting energy and resources from the creative process.

To combat such suits, lawmakers in about 30 states, including California, have enacted laws that give those targeted by lawsuits attacking free speech an effective way to fight back. These laws, known as “anti-SLAPP statutes” (SLAPP = “strategic lawsuit against public participation”), give those sued for exercise of their First Amendment rights on public issues a quiver full of legal arrows that help get these meritless lawsuits dismissed relatively quickly and cheaply. The use of anti-SLAPP statues by media companies is not “dirty” — and it’s not a “secret.” Anti-SLAPP statutes are vital to protecting the First Amendment rights of writers, directors, and the studios that employ them. We at the Motion Picture Association of America are proud of our long history of fighting for filmmakers’ free speech rights. We will continue advocating for strong anti-SLAPP laws that ensure those rights protect us all.

[Ben Sheffner is Vice President, Legal Affairs at the Motion Picture Association of America, Inc.]