In Hurlbut v. Gulf Atl. Life Ins. Co., 749 S.W.2d 762, 766, 31 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 144 (Tex. 1987), a suit brought by an insurance agent against his former employer, we noted that a business disparagement defendant may be held liable "only if he knew of the falsity or acted with reckless disregard concerning it, or if he acted with ill will or intended to interfere in the economic interest of the plaintiff in an unprivileged fashion." Id. (quoting RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS 623A, cmt.g (1977)). To prevail on a business disparagement claim, a plaintiff must establish that: (1) the defendant published false and disparaging information about it; (2) with malice; (3) without privilege; (4) that resulted in special damages to the plaintiff. A business disparagement claim is similar in many respects to a defamation action. Id. The two torts differ in that defamation actions chiefly serve to protect the personal reputation of an injured party, while a business disparagement claim protects economic interests. Id.