Skip to content

Court upholds Jimmy Kimmel's victory in lawsuit filed by George Santos over Cameo video disputes

Appeals court dismisses lawsuit by ex-congressman George Santos against Jimmy Kimmel and ABC network

Court declines Santos' lawsuit against Jimmy Kimmel concerning Cameo app clips
Court declines Santos' lawsuit against Jimmy Kimmel concerning Cameo app clips

Court upholds Jimmy Kimmel's victory in lawsuit filed by George Santos over Cameo video disputes

In a recent development, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan has dismissed a copyright infringement lawsuit filed by former Congressman George Santos against Jimmy Kimmel and ABC. This decision upheld the lower court's ruling to dismiss the lawsuit.

The case involved a dispute over the use of copyrighted material in a comedic context. Santos, who pleaded guilty to federal student loan fraud and aggravated identity theft charges for deceiving donors and stealing people's identities during his congressional campaign, alleged that Kimmel was "capitalizing on and ridiculing" his "gregarious personality" by using personalized videos in a mocking series titled "Will Santos Say It?"

Jimmy Kimmel, in response, used fictitious names to submit requests to Santos for these personalized videos. One such clip saw Santos offering congratulations to a purported winner of a beef-eating contest, calling the feat of consuming 6 pounds (2.7 kilograms) of loose ground beef in under 30 minutes "amazing and impressive."

Santos' life story came under scrutiny after it was revealed that he had fabricated much of it. He was once heralded in the Republican Party for winning a New York congressional seat, but this victory was later tainted by revelations of his false claims, including stating that his mother died in the 9/11 attacks and that he was Jewish, when he is "Jew-ish."

Santos survived two expulsion attempts before being removed from Congress in late 2023 following a scathing House ethics committee report. He reported to a federal prison in New Jersey in July 2025 to serve a seven-year sentence.

The appeals court stated that the lawsuit portrays the defendants as motivated by sarcastic criticism and commentary, protected under the fair use doctrine. The ruling did not immediately receive comments from lawyers involved in the case. The Associated Press holds the copyright for this article in 2025.

Read also:

Latest