Click here for Done Deal Pro home page

Done Deal Pro Home Page

Loading

Go Back   Done Deal Pro Forums > Movies & Television > Writers & Scripts
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-25-2011, 12:46 PM   #171
NikeeGoddess
User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,189
Default Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Unidos View Post
In all seriousness, why would you want a writer who is big on protecting creator/owner rights to NOT involve himself in Guild business?
i want a union rep that will do whatever they can for the benefit of the writers. his position protects the studio who don't really respect the writers.
union reps are not lawyers. that's a different issue. wouldn't want him to be PJ's lawyer either. but even murderers want a lawyer who will fight for them.

in all boils down to selective enforcement. the sly fox needs to look at his own people. one of them leaked the script in the first place.
NikeeGoddess is offline  
Old 03-25-2011, 02:38 PM   #172
nojustice
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 242
Default Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikeeGoddess View Post
i want a union rep that will do whatever they can for the benefit of the writers. his position protects the studio who don't really respect the writers.
Just because someone understands the law, doesn't mean they're taking a particular side or position, it just means they understand the law. I would prefer to have someone who understands the law on my side.

And you're going to have a difficult time explaining how just because a script was leaked therefore Fox is an evil conspirator and as a consequence the law no longer exists and anyone should be able to actively publish it online.
nojustice is offline  
Old 03-25-2011, 02:48 PM   #173
NikeeGoddess
User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 7,189
Default Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

Quote:
Originally Posted by nojustice View Post
And you're going to have a difficult time explaining how just because a script was leaked therefore Fox is an evil conspirator and as a consequence the law no longer exists and anyone should be able to actively publish it online.
i didn't imply this at all. this comes down to "selective enforcement". the sly fox put a lockdown on their scripts but we don't know if they know and/or punished the culprit who leaked the script. maybe he's one of the 10 others. maybe PJ knows who, but don't expect her to speak out about it.
NikeeGoddess is offline  
Old 03-25-2011, 02:53 PM   #174
Joe Unidos
Member
 
Joe Unidos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,942
Default Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

Your supposition that the script was undeniably leaked by a Fox employee is dubious at best. It could have been but, there are countless others who could have held it as a function of their employment who are not Fox employees.

Also, I’ll give you a dollar to please stop saying “sly fox.”
Joe Unidos is offline  
Old 03-25-2011, 03:46 PM   #175
sc111
Member
 
sc111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,339
Default Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

This is all well and good. But why discuss this case in the abstract when you can look at the original original complaint and everything filed after. PJ posted a link in another thread were some guy is tracking this case online. All the motions and responses are there.

I found this Fox verbiage interesting:

"great irreparable injury that cannot fully be compensated or
measured in money. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law."


So I googled it. It's the same exact language used in studio cases against people who illegally download films.

And the verbiage makes total sense in those cases. If everyone can see a film for free, it would be impossible to guesstimate the extent of monetary loss. However, can the same be said for each an every script in the Fox lawsuit? Interesting.
__________________
Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. “Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.”
sc111 is offline  
Old 03-25-2011, 04:02 PM   #176
nojustice
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 242
Default Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

If you're implying that Fox intentionally releases unproduced scripts for the purpose of marketing, then you are going to have her involuntarily committed.

Studios do market movies, but it's more viable closer to the time of release, in the form of trailers.

For many reasons but mostly to protect B.O. they try very hard to keep all aspects under wraps until then. It has been proven many times, most recently with Wolverine, that leaks are very bad for business.
nojustice is offline  
Old 03-25-2011, 05:19 PM   #177
Laura Reyna
Member
 
Laura Reyna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: California coast
Posts: 1,782
Default Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

I think SC's & Nikee's frustration is coming from the idea that we should be pointing out ways PJ could defend herself-- reasons why she has a strong case-- and not harping on why Fox has a strong case.

PJ has a strong "kitchen sink" defense... she has more than one area of defense, not just one, which i think is common in these types of cases.You throw everything and the kitchen sink at the other guy & hope the cumulative effect is strong enough to win the case, or at least scare the other guy.

I would think her lawyers would take all her defenses (including playing the "grandma from Long Island" card) to the Fox people & try to convince them they should drop the suit.

Since there aren't millions being lost by Fox (like the record companies), & no money to be gained by winning the suit, Fox has little monetary incentive to go forward with the case.
__________________

"Trust your stuff." -- Dave Righetti, Pitching Coach

( Formerly "stvnlra" )
Laura Reyna is offline  
Old 03-25-2011, 05:30 PM   #178
ihavebiglips
Member
 
ihavebiglips's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Perched at my Rear Window, spying on Done Dealers.
Posts: 3,440
Default Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

Quote:
Originally Posted by gdubs View Post
You make me think of trapper keepers with unicorn and puffy heart stickers plastered all over them. And bright day-glo snap bracelets. And shooting myself in the face.
ihavebiglips is offline  
Old 03-25-2011, 05:31 PM   #179
nojustice
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 242
Default Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

A large number of obviously thoughtful and experienced professionals have spoken on this thread, and repeatedly tried to explain fundamentals but they've been barked down or stung by sarcastic remarks or abuse.

I can only reiterate what I said earlier, which is that PJ has been at the receiving end of very bad and persistent advice from some very aggressive and prolific posters who have absolutely nothing to do with the every day realities of the film industry. I still think that is her only defense.
nojustice is offline  
Old 03-25-2011, 05:41 PM   #180
sbbn
Regular
 
sbbn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 238
Default Re: This is really depressing (but not unexpected)....

Quote:
Originally Posted by NikeeGoddess View Post
i want a union rep that will do whatever they can for the benefit of the writers. his position protects the studio who don't really respect the writers.
union reps are not lawyers. that's a different issue. wouldn't want him to be PJ's lawyer either. but even murderers want a lawyer who will fight for them.
No, what you want is someone who will tell you what you want to hear, no matter how completely wrong you are.

I'm not taking sides here when it comes to PJ's suit. I've tried carefully to couch everything I say (as much as humanly possible) in general terms about the law rather than specifically discussing PJ's case because frankly, like just about everyone else on this board, I don't know enough about it to talk specifics or to speculate (yes, I have read all the documents that are available -- there's much more to lawsuits than the filed paperwork).

When you say something ridiculous about the law and I respond it isn't because I'm against PJ or for the studio's or anything like that -- it's that being an attorney has given me the insight to know when someone doesn't know what he or she is talking about and is just pulling "legal" bullshit out of the ass.

Plenty of attorneys are will just tell clients what they want to hear. Personally I think that's disingenuous and unfair. What ends up happening then is the client makes stupid, stupid decisions. I've seen people go to prison for well over a hundred years because they made decisions based on their attorneys telling them what they want to hear.

There's a difference between fighting for someone and being stupid. Too often, though, when people are emotional, facing prison or huge liabilities, they don't spend too much time worrying about whether their attorney is fighting for them or just being stupid (and there are a lot of stupid attorneys out there).

If it really needs to be said, I hope the case against PJ gets dropped. But just because I hope that doesn't mean I'm going to go live in never-never-land and pretend the law is something it isn't.

Bottom line: you can want the law to be whatever you want it to be but it doesn't make a damn bit of difference when you're in court and you're flat-out wrong.
sbbn is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Done Deal Pro

eXTReMe Tracker