4480 REVIEW DENIED Statements couched in terms of opinion were held to imply assertions of objective fact that could result in defamation liability; the fact that the publisher of analytic market reports allowed the tenor of its reports to be controlled by its subscribers for the purpose of manipulating stock prices, while marketing those reports as objective analyses, is evidence of actual malice; a subscriber's active participation in the preparation of the reports was sufficient to expose it to defamation liability; defamation by defendant satisfies the "independently wrongful" requirement in an action for intentional interference with prospective business advantage; publication of analytic market reports designed to manipulate the value of shares in a corporation subjects the publisher to liability under Corporations Code section 25400.

OVERSTOCK.COM v GRADIENT (Manipulated Reports) 151 CA4 688 [See: CorpC 25400; Milkovich v Lorain 497 US 1; Ruiz v Harbor View 134 CA4 1456, T/AT 1/06; Shively v Bozanich, 31 C4 1230, T/AT 1/04; Della Penna v Toyota 11 C4 376, T/AT 12/95; Diamond v Superior Court 19 C4 1036, T/AT 2/99]