Defending Against False Activist Disparagement
We sued Greenpeace for its long campaign of misleading accusations against a Canadian forest company, its customers, and suppliers. The suit ended the campaign, forced Greenpeace to admit its claims were not factual, and protected the company against future attacks.
“Greenpeace admits its attacks on Forest Products Giant were ‘non-verifiable.’”
Financial Post
“These are sober admissions after years of irresponsible attacks. It is sad that we have to do all this to straighten out the record.”
Richard Garneau, CEO, Resolute Forest Products
“We may find out if [Greenpeace] has any credibility left to attack.”
The Wall Street Journal
Resolute Forest Products was Canada’s largest forest products company. It had a long record of award-winning sustainability practices, including the planting of a billion trees. It was also a close partner with and employed many of the First Nation indigenous people who made their livelihood from managing and responsibly harvesting the forest.
For years, Greenpeace carried out an activist campaign against Resolute and its biggest customers. The campaign made claims, among many, that Resolute was operating in prohibited areas, jeopardizing endangered species and destroying their habitat, and destroying pristine ancient forests. Greenpeace used these claims not only to pressure Resolute’s customers to stop buying its products, but also to raise money.
We brought civil RICO and commercial disparagement claims against Greenpeace. That suit exposed the truth, stopped the campaign, and allowed Resolute and its customers to restore their brand and reputations and continue doing business with each other. It also forced Greenpeace to publicly admit its claims were “non-verifiable” “rhetorical hyperbole” and “heated rhetoric” that “do not hew to strict literalism or scientific precision” and were merely intended “in a loose figurative sense” and not “literal[ly].” More important, Greenpeace was forced to publicly admit that it had “no knowledge of illegal operations in off-limit areas by Resolute.”
The strong public rebuttal reflected in the suit, the public admission it compelled, and the cessation of the campaign that followed allowed Resolute and its customers to continue their businesses without interference or further brand damage. The case also set a precedent for the defense of other activist campaigns, including another suit against Greenpeace that we investigated and filed that resulted in a $600 million judgment against the company by successor counsel after we left our prior firm.