- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: SIAP: Duffer Brothers sued for stealing “Stranger Things” idea from short film
Posted on 4/4/18 at 7:34 pm to TigerinATL
Posted on 4/4/18 at 7:34 pm to TigerinATL
quote:
This is a laughable connection. The owners of Dungeons and Dragons have a better case for them stealing ideas.
Or Doom.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:22 pm to ZappBrannigan
quote:
Nature of the beast.
Babylon 5/ DS9
Fables/Once upon a time
Asylum films
Disaster films that come in pairs from two studios.
He's up a creek without a paddle because this will likely fall into same area as Dan Brown being sued for Da Vinci Code.
Everyone works with the same material, in this case government conspiracies and mad science at a well publicized site.
Also being a totally different method of showing the story goes against it.
Some people are far too immediately dismissive of this sort of thing for whatever philosophical or political reason. None of the examples you give are relevant to the claimed situation here. Except for the Asylum films, they're all easily treated as separate projects from separate studios regarding a very general concept. The idea of a drama in space or an asteroid headed for earth is much more general than the accusation that a proposed project's details were lifted directly from a pitch and used without credit. Claims of plagiarism and intellectual theft are dealt with all the time in Hollywood, frequently to the benefit of the accusers. Hell, the industry actually anticipates this sort of thing and will often just go ahead and settle to avoid a protracted legal battle so everyone can go home happy.
Studios themselves tend to be less litigious because it's just not worth the effort for anything less than a major franchise (like Disney properties, for instance), which explains Asylum films. The few dollars they might lose won't be recouped from cheap knockoffs and they aren't anticipating much of an ongoing ROI for some one-off film. Most writers, on the other hand, not having hundreds of millions of dollars at their disposal, have a lot more to gain from squeezing money out of a major corporation.
Let Asylum make a series of movies about Duke Skyclimber in a "Star Force" trilogy and see what happens.
This post was edited on 4/4/18 at 10:24 pm
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:23 pm to Volvagia
Paramount had the show bible and 20 or so written episodes in various states of completion years before Babylon 5 was finally picked up and then DS9 went in production using the B5 bible.
Once Upon a Time happened after Fables was shopped around for a TV show.
A quick wiki summary of the Dan Brown stuff,
Dan Brown is a good comparison here because the guy is trying to claim Jesus-Mary Magdaline and the bloodline as his invention. When it's been in public play for longer than his books have been out.
Montauk is the same way as the above and Groom Lake/Area 51 it's a cultural icon, you can't just claim the concepts as your own invention. It's a public mythos.
Once Upon a Time happened after Fables was shopped around for a TV show.
A quick wiki summary of the Dan Brown stuff,
quote:
Copyright infringement cases
In August 2005 author Lewis Perdue unsuccessfully sued Brown for plagiarism, on the basis of claimed similarity between The Da Vinci Code and his novels, The Da Vinci Legacy (1983) and Daughter of God (2000). Judge George Daniels said, in part: "A reasonable average lay observer would not conclude that The Da Vinci Code is substantially similar to Daughter of God."[32]
In April 2006 Brown's publisher, Random House, won a copyright infringement case brought by authors Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, who claimed that Brown stole ideas from their 1982 book Holy Blood Holy Grail for his 2003 novel The Da Vinci Code. It was in the book Holy Blood Holy Grail that Baigent, Leigh, and co-author Henry Lincoln had advanced the theory that Jesus and Mary Magdalene married and had a child and that the bloodline continues to this day. Brown apparently alluded to the two authors' names in his book. Leigh Teabing, a lead character in both the novel and the film, uses Leigh's name as the first name, and anagrammatically derives his last name from Baigent's. Mr Justice Peter Smith found in Brown's favor in the case, and as a private amusement, embedded his own Smithy code in the written judgment.[33]
On March 28, 2007, Brown's publisher, Random House, won an appeal copyright infringement case. The Court of Appeal of England and Wales rejected the efforts from Baigent and Leigh, who became liable for paying legal expenses of nearly US$6 million.[34]
Brown has been sued twice in U.S. Federal courts by the author Jack Dunn who claims Brown copied a huge part of his book The Vatican Boys to write The Da Vinci Code (2006–07) and Angels & Demons (2011-12). Both lawsuits were not allowed to go to a jury trial. In 2017, in London, another claim was begun against Brown by Jack Dunn who claimed that Justice was not served in the U.S. lawsuits
Dan Brown is a good comparison here because the guy is trying to claim Jesus-Mary Magdaline and the bloodline as his invention. When it's been in public play for longer than his books have been out.
Montauk is the same way as the above and Groom Lake/Area 51 it's a cultural icon, you can't just claim the concepts as your own invention. It's a public mythos.
Posted on 4/4/18 at 10:28 pm to ZappBrannigan
Yeah it happens all the time
Studios routinely will steal scripts from screenwriters
Studios routinely will steal scripts from screenwriters
Posted on 4/5/18 at 8:49 am to ZappBrannigan
But did either of these EXPICITLY REFER TO THE CLAIMED SOURCE IN PLANNING DOCUMENTS.
Courts are going to give a LOT of benefit of the doubt to avoid litigation in vaguely similar plots/avoid stifling creativity.
So unless DS9/B5 casting calls had reference notes for it being a substitute for a source character, the two aren’t the same.
Courts are going to give a LOT of benefit of the doubt to avoid litigation in vaguely similar plots/avoid stifling creativity.
So unless DS9/B5 casting calls had reference notes for it being a substitute for a source character, the two aren’t the same.
Posted on 4/5/18 at 10:00 am to Volvagia
I get the righteous fury thing. But the smoking gun is what?
You can't trademark or copyright names like Barbara or Montauk.
So unless it really is the same character can't do much.
I'm just going off the little tidbits that TMZ has here. But I'm not seeing kiss off money being paid from it.
It's not hard for a production company to say I like your concept but no and then go do their own thing with it, which probably did happen here. And like I first stated, nature of the beast.
You can't trademark or copyright names like Barbara or Montauk.
So unless it really is the same character can't do much.
I'm just going off the little tidbits that TMZ has here. But I'm not seeing kiss off money being paid from it.
It's not hard for a production company to say I like your concept but no and then go do their own thing with it, which probably did happen here. And like I first stated, nature of the beast.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News