Ready to Register?

MyLawCLE All-Access Pass

Best choice

Add the All-Access Pass and get this program —
plus 1,000+ live CLE programs every year.


All specialty & ethics credits included
38 practice areas
New sections: AI & the Law, Practice Management
100s of current and trending legal topics
Nationally recognized and highly experienced presenters

$395 / year — this program included
Register with the All-Access Pass

This program + 1,000+ CLE programs, all year

Or register for just this program

Live Video Broadcast

Live webinar of this one program.
$195 Register

On-Demand Video

Recorded access + self-study credit.
$195 Register

Suing AI Publishers for Defamation: The Plaintiff’s Case From Notice Letter to Lost Profits

A false AI chatbot or AI search answer can cost your client customers, reputation, and profits. Learn to screen AI defamation cases, send notice letters that establish the developer’s knowledge, plead complaints that survive dismissal, and prove fault and lost profits to a jury.

2026-12-10 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-12-10 12:00:00

2026-12-10 12:00:00

2h CLE Credits

2026-12-10 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-12-10 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-12-10 12:00:00

Over 1,000+ webinars

2026-12-10 12:00:00

Course Overview

When a Chatbot Defames Your Client, Your Notice Letter Becomes Your Best Evidence

2026-12-10 12:00:00

Walters v. OpenAI ended on fault and damages. Then a Delaware Superior Court credited the complaint in Starbuck v. Google. Lawyers representing people and businesses harmed by false generative AI chatbot and AI search answers now have their first practical roadmap, from intake to proof.

Skip prompt and output capture, and your factual record is thin. Send a vague notice letter, and you cannot show what the developer knew. Plead fault loosely, and the case ends where Walters did. Ignore arbitration, venue, and choice of law, and you may litigate in the wrong forum. Overlook anti-SLAPP, and fee risk reshapes the case’s economics. Leave disclaimers, prompt manipulation, and CDA § 230 unanswered, and the defense controls the motion to dismiss.

You walk out with the plaintiff’s working file: an intake grid, notice and preservation letter templates, a complaint checklist, Rule 30(b)(6) deposition topics, and a damages-proof matrix. You will see how persistence after notice becomes proof of negligence or actual malice, how to choose a technical expert, and how to trace lost customers to lost profits. This is trial judgment and work product no chatbot can supply.

Format

CLE Credit

2h CLE Credits

Level

Intermediate

Length

2

Key topics that will be covered

01
Screening and Evidence Capture
How Walters and Starbuck change which AI defamation matters you take, and how to build the factual record by capturing prompts, outputs, and related evidence.
02
Notice That Proves Knowledge
How notice-and-hold letters, correction requests, and continued publication after notice become evidence of the developer’s knowledge and reckless disregard.
03
Forum and Fee Exposure
How jurisdiction, venue, arbitration, choice of law, and anti-SLAPP issues determine where you file and what the case may cost.
04
Pleading Past Dismissal
How to plead publication, damages, and the applicable fault standard, negligence or actual malice, and answer disclaimers, prompt manipulation, and CDA § 230 defenses.
05
Discovery and Expert Proof
How preservation letters, Rule 30(b)(6) topics, a technical expert on feasible fixes, and lessons from Palin v. The New York Times defeat the “honest mistake” defense for hallucinations.
06
Damages and Trial Leverage
How to prove lost customers, lost profits to reasonable certainty, and presumed and punitive damages, and use injunctions, retraction statutes, jury themes, and corporate-witness cross-examination.

Program schedule

clock 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm EST

Pleading AI Chatbot Defamation Complaints That Survive Dismissal

Krista will teach plaintiff-side defamation pleading against generative-AI developers, for counsel who have litigated defamation cases but never sued an AI publisher. The hour covers building your factual record, including prompt/output capture and preparing a correction notice that establishes notice; addressing issues with jurisdiction, venue, choice of law and anti-SLAPP; and pleading the Starbuck-credited allegations on publication, fault standard, and damages.

Krista L. BaughmanKrista L. Baughman
clock 1:10 pm - 2:10 pm EST

Proving Fault and Lost Profits When AI Search Defames a Business

This session teaches the plaintiff’s side of an AI-search defamation case brought by a business: proving fault and lost profits to a jury. Drawing on lessons from high-profile actual-malice and privacy trials such as Palin v. The New York Times and Bollea v. Gawker, the hour covers turning notice and continued publication into proof of negligence or reckless disregard, Rule 30(b)(6) discovery into what the developer knew, the technical expert, and proof of lost profits and presumed and punitive damages, plus injunctive relief and anti-SLAPP fee risk. It is taught from a board-certified civil trial and business litigation perspective, informed by current litigation over AI-generated content.

Shane B. VogtShane B. Vogt
Krista L. Baughman

Krista L. Baughman

Baughman Law PC

Shane B. Vogt

Shane B. Vogt

Vogt Law

Krista L. Baughman

Krista L. Baughman

Baughman Law PC

Krista L. Baughman represents clients suing global technology companies over AI-generated defamation, including a case against Google that the court described as “a new frontier for defamation law.” She is the founder and managing attorney of Baughman Law PC in Walnut Creek, California, where she handles defamation, First Amendment, and civil liberties litigation, together with pre-publication review and post-publication advocacy.

Education & Credentials

Ms. Baughman received her J.D., cum laude, from Brooklyn Law School and her B.A. in International Relations, magna cum laude, from Lehigh University. She is admitted to practice in California, New York, and the District of Columbia, and before the U.S. Supreme Court; the Ninth, Sixth, and Eleventh Circuits; the Central, Northern, Eastern, and Southern Districts of California; the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York; and the District of Columbia. She served as a judicial extern in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in 2006.

Recognition & Leadership

She sits on the Board of the First Amendment Lawyers Association (FALA) and on the Executive Committee of the Federalist Society’s Free Speech Practice Group. She also serves as Secretary of the Executive Committee of the San Francisco Bar Association Litigation Section.

Professional Involvement

Her writing addresses AI liability directly, including "Defamation By Chatbot: Why Section 230 Doesn't Protect The New Tech," along with "Is an algorithmic feed 'speech'? Courts are about to decide" and "Wolff v. Trump and the preemptive anti-SLAPP gambit: A tale of two statutes."

She has spoken for Strafford MCLE on "Battling Corporate Internet Trolls: Going After Imposters and Competitors That Break the Law" (2020), the ReutersNEXT Virtual Global Conference on "Creating a Matrix for Truth in Social Media" (2021), and the First Amendment Lawyers Association on "Attorney Speech: Trends and Case Studies" (2023). Her other appearances include two Thomson Reuters Institute programs (2020 and 2021), a 2025 Federalist Society litigation update on Defending Education v. Olentangy Local School District Board of Education, KALW 91.7 FM's "Your Legal Rights" (June 2026), the NCC News podcast (September 2026), and free speech panels at UC Berkeley School of Law and Golden Gate University School of Law (2017).

Experience

Ms. Baughman's current docket includes suits against global technology companies over AI-generated defamation, and she advises writers, journalists, businesses, and individuals seeking corrections, retractions, or apologies. Before founding Baughman Law, she spent a decade heading the First Amendment practice of a national boutique.

Her work has produced multi-million-dollar judgments, precedent-setting jury verdicts, and landmark settlements protecting university students' First Amendment rights. She has also eliminated unconstitutional city council meeting policies and helped define how speech and privacy laws apply to elected officials. Her earlier positions include Senior Associate at Dhillon & Smith (2009–2025), Contract Attorney at Bloomberg Finance LP (2008–2009), and Summer Associate at Condon & Forsyth LLP (2007).
Shane B. Vogt

Shane B. Vogt

Vogt Law

Shane B. Vogt is lead counsel for Sarah Palin in Palin v. The New York Times Co., which his firm describes as the first defamation trial against The New York Times in nearly half a century. He also helped lead the trial team in Terry Bollea (“Hulk Hogan”) v. Gawker Media, a 2016 invasion-of-privacy jury trial that ended in a $141.1 million verdict. More recently, he filed Jane Doe v. John Smith in federal court in New Jersey on behalf of a high-school student targeted with AI-generated non-consensual nude images. A Tampa trial lawyer, he founded Vogt Law and is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in both Business Litigation and Civil Trial Law.

Education & Credentials

Mr. Vogt earned his law degree magna cum laude from Stetson College of Law in 1999, graduating second in his class, and has been a member of The Florida Bar since 2000. He has been Board Certified in Business Litigation since 2015 and in Civil Trial Law since 2021. He is admitted before the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Eleventh and Second Circuits and the U.S. District Courts for the Middle, Northern, and Southern Districts of Florida, and he has appeared pro hac vice in courts including New York, New Jersey, and California.

He graduated with high honors from Eckerd College in 1996, where he was named to the Sunshine State Conference All-Freshman Basketball Team in 1993, played on the 1994–1995 Conference Championship team, and competed in the NCAA Division II Men's Basketball National Tournament.

Recognition & Leadership

Courtroom View Network named him its 2016 Florida Plaintiff’s Attorney of the Year, recognition tied to a $140 million verdict. He has been named a Florida Super Lawyer® since 2020 and recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® since 2021, and he holds an AV Preeminent® rating from Martindale-Hubbell. He is also listed among America’s Top 100 High Stakes Litigators. At Stetson, he received the Victor O'Wehle Trial Advocacy Award and the William F. Blews Pro Bono Service Award.

Professional Involvement

Mr. Vogt is a member of The Florida Bar’s Trial Law Section and its Entertainment, Arts & Sports Law Section. On October 22, 2025, he appeared on Fox News’ The Will Cain Show to discuss the lawsuit his client filed against ClothOff, an AI software allegedly used to create fake nude photos.

Experience

Mr. Vogt's trial work centers on defamation and privacy claims against major media defendants. He has tried Palin v. The New York Times Co. in the Southern District of New York in 2022 and again in 2025, with multiple appeals between them, and he regularly litigates against the country's leading media and First Amendment defense firms.

His AI-related work includes Jane Doe v. John Smith, in which a 2025 injunction hearing in New Jersey federal court produced what his firm describes as the first known injunction entered against AI-generated non-consensual nude images created with an "undress" or "nudify" app.

On the plaintiff side, he helped obtain permanent injunctive relief for Bishop Charles Blake against defamatory YouTube videos in Bishop Charles Blake v. Earl Carter, Jr., and he has pursued defamation claims seeking punitive damages in Mark Holford v. Aquatech Pools G.C. and defamation and false-police-report claims in Wendy Haney v. Ferrell Marrs. On the defense side, he has won dismissals and attorneys' fees under Florida's anti-SLAPP statutes in Steven Selz v. Jurgen Timperman, Norman Gundel v. AV Homes, Inc., and Matthew Mathias v. Kelly Lichter, and he defended Carole Baskin and Big Cat Rescue in Anne McQueen v. Carole Baskin.

His business and intellectual property work includes an emergency injunction for Lazydays RV against REV Recreation Group, defending Robert James Ritchie ("Kid Rock") against trademark claims by Feld Entertainment, Lanham Act false advertising claims against Warner Bros. over the film War Dogs, and defending "Sugar" Shane Mosley against Don King Productions. Before founding Vogt Law, he practiced at Bajo Cuva Cohen Turkel in Tampa.
Krista L. Baughman

Krista L. Baughman

Baughman Law PC

Krista L. Baughman represents clients suing global technology companies over AI-generated defamation, including a case against Google that the court described as “a new frontier for defamation law.” She is the founder and managing attorney of Baughman Law PC in Walnut Creek, California, where she handles defamation, First Amendment, and civil liberties litigation, together with pre-publication review and post-publication advocacy.

Education & Credentials

Ms. Baughman received her J.D., cum laude, from Brooklyn Law School and her B.A. in International Relations, magna cum laude, from Lehigh University. She is admitted to practice in California, New York, and the District of Columbia, and before the U.S. Supreme Court; the Ninth, Sixth, and Eleventh Circuits; the Central, Northern, Eastern, and Southern Districts of California; the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York; and the District of Columbia. She served as a judicial extern in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in 2006.

Recognition & Leadership

She sits on the Board of the First Amendment Lawyers Association (FALA) and on the Executive Committee of the Federalist Society’s Free Speech Practice Group. She also serves as Secretary of the Executive Committee of the San Francisco Bar Association Litigation Section.

Professional Involvement

Her writing addresses AI liability directly, including "Defamation By Chatbot: Why Section 230 Doesn't Protect The New Tech," along with "Is an algorithmic feed 'speech'? Courts are about to decide" and "Wolff v. Trump and the preemptive anti-SLAPP gambit: A tale of two statutes."

She has spoken for Strafford MCLE on "Battling Corporate Internet Trolls: Going After Imposters and Competitors That Break the Law" (2020), the ReutersNEXT Virtual Global Conference on "Creating a Matrix for Truth in Social Media" (2021), and the First Amendment Lawyers Association on "Attorney Speech: Trends and Case Studies" (2023). Her other appearances include two Thomson Reuters Institute programs (2020 and 2021), a 2025 Federalist Society litigation update on Defending Education v. Olentangy Local School District Board of Education, KALW 91.7 FM's "Your Legal Rights" (June 2026), the NCC News podcast (September 2026), and free speech panels at UC Berkeley School of Law and Golden Gate University School of Law (2017).

Experience

Ms. Baughman's current docket includes suits against global technology companies over AI-generated defamation, and she advises writers, journalists, businesses, and individuals seeking corrections, retractions, or apologies. Before founding Baughman Law, she spent a decade heading the First Amendment practice of a national boutique.

Her work has produced multi-million-dollar judgments, precedent-setting jury verdicts, and landmark settlements protecting university students' First Amendment rights. She has also eliminated unconstitutional city council meeting policies and helped define how speech and privacy laws apply to elected officials. Her earlier positions include Senior Associate at Dhillon & Smith (2009–2025), Contract Attorney at Bloomberg Finance LP (2008–2009), and Summer Associate at Condon & Forsyth LLP (2007).
Shane B. Vogt

Shane B. Vogt

Vogt Law

Shane B. Vogt is lead counsel for Sarah Palin in Palin v. The New York Times Co., which his firm describes as the first defamation trial against The New York Times in nearly half a century. He also helped lead the trial team in Terry Bollea (“Hulk Hogan”) v. Gawker Media, a 2016 invasion-of-privacy jury trial that ended in a $141.1 million verdict. More recently, he filed Jane Doe v. John Smith in federal court in New Jersey on behalf of a high-school student targeted with AI-generated non-consensual nude images. A Tampa trial lawyer, he founded Vogt Law and is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in both Business Litigation and Civil Trial Law.

Education & Credentials

Mr. Vogt earned his law degree magna cum laude from Stetson College of Law in 1999, graduating second in his class, and has been a member of The Florida Bar since 2000. He has been Board Certified in Business Litigation since 2015 and in Civil Trial Law since 2021. He is admitted before the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Eleventh and Second Circuits and the U.S. District Courts for the Middle, Northern, and Southern Districts of Florida, and he has appeared pro hac vice in courts including New York, New Jersey, and California.

He graduated with high honors from Eckerd College in 1996, where he was named to the Sunshine State Conference All-Freshman Basketball Team in 1993, played on the 1994–1995 Conference Championship team, and competed in the NCAA Division II Men's Basketball National Tournament.

Recognition & Leadership

Courtroom View Network named him its 2016 Florida Plaintiff’s Attorney of the Year, recognition tied to a $140 million verdict. He has been named a Florida Super Lawyer® since 2020 and recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® since 2021, and he holds an AV Preeminent® rating from Martindale-Hubbell. He is also listed among America’s Top 100 High Stakes Litigators. At Stetson, he received the Victor O'Wehle Trial Advocacy Award and the William F. Blews Pro Bono Service Award.

Professional Involvement

Mr. Vogt is a member of The Florida Bar’s Trial Law Section and its Entertainment, Arts & Sports Law Section. On October 22, 2025, he appeared on Fox News’ The Will Cain Show to discuss the lawsuit his client filed against ClothOff, an AI software allegedly used to create fake nude photos.

Experience

Mr. Vogt's trial work centers on defamation and privacy claims against major media defendants. He has tried Palin v. The New York Times Co. in the Southern District of New York in 2022 and again in 2025, with multiple appeals between them, and he regularly litigates against the country's leading media and First Amendment defense firms.

His AI-related work includes Jane Doe v. John Smith, in which a 2025 injunction hearing in New Jersey federal court produced what his firm describes as the first known injunction entered against AI-generated non-consensual nude images created with an "undress" or "nudify" app.

On the plaintiff side, he helped obtain permanent injunctive relief for Bishop Charles Blake against defamatory YouTube videos in Bishop Charles Blake v. Earl Carter, Jr., and he has pursued defamation claims seeking punitive damages in Mark Holford v. Aquatech Pools G.C. and defamation and false-police-report claims in Wendy Haney v. Ferrell Marrs. On the defense side, he has won dismissals and attorneys' fees under Florida's anti-SLAPP statutes in Steven Selz v. Jurgen Timperman, Norman Gundel v. AV Homes, Inc., and Matthew Mathias v. Kelly Lichter, and he defended Carole Baskin and Big Cat Rescue in Anne McQueen v. Carole Baskin.

His business and intellectual property work includes an emergency injunction for Lazydays RV against REV Recreation Group, defending Robert James Ritchie ("Kid Rock") against trademark claims by Feld Entertainment, Lanham Act false advertising claims against Warner Bros. over the film War Dogs, and defending "Sugar" Shane Mosley against Don King Productions. Before founding Vogt Law, he practiced at Bajo Cuva Cohen Turkel in Tampa.

Credits by state

AK2.0
AL2.0
AR2.0
AZ2.0
CA2.0
CO2.0
CT2.0
DC2.0
DE2.0
FL2.0
GA2.0
HI2.0
IA2.0
ID2.0
IL2.0
IN2.0
KS2.0
KY2.0
LA2.0
MA2.0
MD2.0
ME2.0
MI2.0
MN2.0
MO2.4
MS2.0
MT2.0
NC2.0
ND2.0
NE2.0
NH120.0
NJ2.0
NM2.0
NV2.0
NY2.0
OH2.0
OK2.5
OR2.0
PA2.0
RI2.5
SC2.0
SD2.0
TN2.0
TX2.0
UT2.0
VA2.0
VT2.0
WA2.0
WI2.0
WV2.4
WY2.0

Upcoming Live Online CLE Broadcasts

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

10,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

MCLE Credits

Alabama
Pending
Alaska
Approved
Arizona
Approved
Arkansas
Approved
California
Approved
Colorado
Pending
Connecticut
Approved
Delaware
Pending
District of Columbia
No Required
Florida
Pending
Georgia
Pending
Hawaii
Approved
Idaho
Pending
Illinois
Pending
Indiana
Pending
Iowa
Pending
Kansas
Pending
Kentucky
Pending
Louisiana
Pending
Maine
Pending
Maryland
No Required
Massachusetts
No Required
Michigan
No Required
Minnesota
Pending
Mississippi
Pending
Missouri
Approved
Montana
Pending
Nebraska
Pending
Nevada
Pending
New Hampshire
Approved
New Jersey
Approved
New Mexico
Approved
New York
Approved
North Carolina
Pending
North Dakota
Approved
Ohio
Pending
Oklahoma
Pending
Oregon
Pending
Pennsylvania
Approved
Rhode Island
Pending
South Carolina
Pending
South Dakota
No Required
Tennessee
Pending
Texas
Approved
Utah
Pending
Vermont
Approved
Virginia
Not Eligible
Washington
Approved
West Virginia
Pending
Wisconsin
Pending
Wyoming
Pending

Alabama

Requirements

The Alabama State Bar MCLE Commission requires attorneys to complete 12 credits, including 1 ethics, by December 31 of each year. All credits must be reported by February 15 of the following year. A maximum of 12 credits, including 1 ethics credit, may be carried over for 1 year only.  

Formats

  • Attorneys can earn unlimited “live” credit through live seminars, live webcasts, and co-sponsored locations with MyLAWCLE-Alabama approved programs
  • Attorneys are limited to 6 credits per compliance period of “online” programs through MyLAwCLE On-Demand programs