Chaker v. Mateo (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 1138, involved a plaintiff embroiled in a contentious paternity and child support dispute with the mother of his child. (Chaker, supra, 209 Cal.App.4th at p. 1141.) The woman's mother posted a series of derogatory comments about the plaintiff and his business on a consumer Web site where the public could comment on the reliability and honesty of service providers, and also on a social networking Web site that provided members an open forum to comment on a variety of topics. The posts warned people not to deal with the plaintiff and accused him of being a deadbeat dad, a criminal, and a fraud and also of "using people." (Id. at p. 1142.) The plaintiff sued the mother for defamation and she successfully moved to strike the plaintiff's complaint as a SLAPP suit. (Ibid.) Although the statements arose out of a private dispute and relationship, the Chaker court concluded they satisfied the public interest requirement because they concerned the plaintiff's "character and business practices" and "were intended to serve as a warning to consumers about his trustworthiness." (Chaker, supra, 209 Cal.App.4th at p. 1146.) As for the social networking site posts, Chaker noted they occurred after the plaintiff created a profile on the site and therefore he "clearly must have recognized that other participants in the Web site would have a legitimate interest in knowing about his character before engaging him on the Web site." (Id. at pp. 1146-1147.)