A judge has ruled that the blockbuster hit “Baby Reindeer” may be defamatory, paving the way for ongoing defamation lawsuits against the series and streaming service Netflix to continue.

According to a recent judicial order obtained by People, Judge Gary Klausner ruled that viewers could easily identify the show as a “true story” and allowed the real-life Martha Fiona Harvey to continue seeking $170 million in damages.

In his ruling, the judge “disagreed with Netflix's assertion that the show is ultimately a fiction,” despite the words “on the screen at the beginning of the series that ‘this is a true story,’” People reported.

On June 6, Harvey filed a lawsuit against Netflix in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, alleging that the streaming service defamed her and willfully inflicted emotional distress, negligence, and violation of her right of publicity due to her resemblance to Martha (played by Jessica Gunning). filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

According to Harvey, as a result of the show, viewers successfully sought her out and discovered her true identity.

Her $170 million lawsuit includes $50 million in actual damages, more than $50 million in compensatory damages for “emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, and loss of business,” and at least $50 million in “all profits from Baby Reindeer.” at least $20 million in punitive damages.

“The lies (Netflix) told to more than 50 million people around the world about Harvey included that he was a twice-convicted stalker who was sentenced to five years in prison and that Harvey sexually assaulted Gad,” Variety As previously reported, the lawsuit application states.

“Defendants told these lies and never stopped because they were better than the truth and good stories make money.

In his order, Judge Klausner substantially advances most of Harvey's claims asserted in the lawsuit and allows them to proceed to trial. Judge Klausner compared Harvey to the fictional Martha, writing that “there is a significant difference between stalking and being convicted in court,” “inappropriate touching and sexual assault,” and “pushing and shoving.”

Netflix argued that “no reasonable person would understand the statements [about Harvey] as factual assertions,” but the judge disagreed, stating that the events depicted in the hit series “would be construed as factual assertions.”

“The first episode explicitly states that ‘this is a true story,’” Klausner wrote, “thereby inducing the viewer to accept the statements as factual.”