Disney loses the legal bid to block YouTube hiring Justin Connolly
A judge of the California Supreme Court rejected Disney’s request to prevent a temporary restraining ban that tried to prevent Justin Connolly on YouTube.
Last month, after Connolly Disney had left to become a member of YouTube as the worldwide VP of media and sports partnerships, Disney YouTube and Connolly complained, which claimed that breach of contract, unlawful interference in a contractual relationship and unfair competition.
Judge James C. Chalfant published a statement on Wednesday that denied Disney’s motion for an order after a hearing in the case earlier in the day. The judge mentioned three reasons for the decision: Disney’s “lack of tones of emergency”; that the “balance between damage works in favor or Mr. Connolly”; And that Disney “has not demonstrated a chance of success compared to the merits.”
Asked for comments, a Disney spokesperson said: “We are disappointed in today’s ruling, but will continue to pursue our legal remedies.” YouTube refused to comment.
Connolly, who spent two decades in Disney and ESPN, was recently president of Disney Platform Distribution. In that capacity, he supervised all external sales efforts for distribution, affiliate marketing and affiliated business activities included with YouTube.
In his court case, Disney said that the deal of the company for YouTube TV will soon be expiring and that it would “be extremely detrimental to Disney for Connolly to violate the contract that he negotiated only a few months ago and changes teams when Disney works on a new license agreement with the company trying to iron him.”
YouTube said, in the objection of 2 June against Disney’s lawsuit, At the beginning of April 2025, Google and Disney exchanged communication with regard to Google’s wish to hire Connolly for the YouTube roll, according to the submission of YouTube. Disney asked for his renewal negotiations with YouTube – which would normally only start around August 2025 – to make the internet company ‘priority’ by YouTube.
Instead of calling on Connolly’s contract that he would prevent Disney from leaving Disney to become a member of YouTube, according to YouTube: “Disney has made it clear that it is planning to use Mr Connolly as a pawn to promote the re -negotiation of licensing with YouTube.”
In the meantime, according to the Disney lawsuit, Connolly had signed a three -year contract in November 2024 that his move to YouTube would have violated. But according to YouTube, Disney Connolly actually used an AT-Willem base and that an order that requires Connolly to leave his new position on YouTube “would be explicitly prohibited by status and other controlling Californian legislation.”
YouTube also challenged Disney’s request for ’emergency assistance’, in which he argued in his submission of 2 June that ‘Disney had already known for more than six weeks that Mr. Connolly was planning to leave Disney and become a member of YouTube.’
