• by Wendy Davis  @wendyndavis, May 8, 2013

Sports blog Deadspin has been hit with a lawsuit for scooping TV personality Dr. Phil by posting video excerpts of his interview with the Manti Te'o hoaxer before the interview aired.

In a complaint filed this week in U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Texas, Peteski Productions, which produces the “Dr. Phil Show,” accuses the Gawker-owned blog of engaging in “a pre-meditated plan to steal Peteski's copyrighted material.”

Specifically, Peteski says that Deadspin posted excerpts of a show in which Ronaiah Tuiasosopo spoke in the same voice that he used when carrying out the scam, in which he pretended to be the girlfriend of Notre Dame football player Manti Te'o.

Te'o, a Heisman Trophy contender, told numerous reporters that his girlfriend died last September. But in January, Deadspin uncovered that his “girlfriend” was fictional. Within days, it came out that Tuiasosopo perpetrated the hoax.

Dr. Phil subsequently interviewed Tuiasosopo and aired the footage on two days -- Jan. 31 and Feb. 1. The first show ended with the tease that Tuiasosopo might recreate the voice he used to dupe Te'o.

Tuiasosopo did so, and Deadspin obtained the footage and posted an excerpt of it on the site on Feb. 1, before the “Dr. Phil Show” aired, according to the lawsuit. The talk show host now argues that Deadspin's move cost the TV show viewers.

“Although the second show was expected to exceed the ratings number of the first show, in fact, the ratings declined substantially because the result of the 'cliffhanger' was no longer in doubt. It had been misappropriated by Deadspin,” the lawsuit alleges.

“Gawker deliberately set out to get 'the jump' on the rest of the country and 'scoop' Dr. Phil with his own content. They did not earn that right, they stole it,” Peteski says in the complaint.

If the case doesn't settle, Gawker could argue that its excerpts of the material are protected by fair use principles. Publishers often argue that posting brief excerpts is a fair use, especially when done for purposes of commentary or criticism. But the timing of the post in this case could weigh against a fair-use finding, according to Santa Clara University law professor Eric Goldman. “In practice, defendants are less likely to get a fair use defense if they quickly republish time-sensitive content,” he says.