Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

    The based on a book by credit was for selling her book rights. That's not a WGA issue. They don't arbitrate that.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

      Okay, question.

      So off reading her blog post, it seemed to me that the idea of the station being destroyed and the character drifting in space wasn't part of the original novel. She wrote it later as part of the script.

      If she did that while being paid by the studio, wouldn't that work belong to them?

      I'm honestly asking.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

        Originally posted by UnequalProductions View Post
        Okay, question.

        So off reading her blog post, it seemed to me that the idea of the station being destroyed and the character drifting in space wasn't part of the original novel. She wrote it later as part of the script.

        If she did that while being paid by the studio, wouldn't that work belong to them?

        I'm honestly asking.
        Without reading the specific contract, and being experts in this sort of contract, we can't say if it matters.

        She makes it sound like she's entitled to that bonus if the project gets filmed in any way. If that is accurate, then it's a question of "is this movie the same project or not." That's why the attachment of Cuaron to what was (then) indisputably her project matters - she's using that to argue that the project Cuaron made is the same project she originally wrote.

        eg, I suspect the studio's argument is something like this:

        1) Writer A creates project A at company 1.
        2) Director attached to project A at company 1.
        3) Projet A dies.
        4) Company 2 acquires company 1.
        5) Director creates project B with writer B and sets it up at company 2.
        6) Project B gets made.
        7) Obviously writer A doesn't deserve anything having to do with project B.

        Whereas she's saying that project A and project B are the same project.

        There are facts we don't know that could swing this either way. e.g., did company 2 writer off expenses from project A against the profits from project B? Did the director create project B in some form before attaching to project A? Was project B set up another a third company before going to company 2?

        I could imagine that Cuaron came in and said, for example, "add a meteor shower destroying the space station," which she did. And then, when the project doesn't happen, he wants to add that to another project. "Using this element we discussed on another project" doesn't make them the same project, necessarily.

        So, like I said: we need to not jump to conclusions. I'm not saying the above is what happened. I'm saying it's what COULD HAVE happened. It's also possible that they saw a way to screw her out of a million bucks and took it. We don't know the facts to come to a conclusion one way or the other.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

          Okay, but separating ourselves from this specific example.

          In general, if you make changes to a script after a studio has optioned it, do they own those changes? If the option expires, and you move on, what can and can't you keep?

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

            Originally posted by UnequalProductions View Post
            Okay, but separating ourselves from this specific example.

            In general, if you make changes to a script after a studio has optioned it, do they own those changes? If the option expires, and you move on, what can and can't you keep?
            Ah.

            In general, yes. That's the standard in a negotiation. You usually have some sort of right to reacquire them.

            In theory, you could go back to the original script and go from there. In practice, when the film approaches production the new company comes to some sort of agreement with the old company to buy out any rights and resolve any ambiguities. (The old company is happy to pay off some of the debt they racked up on developing the project. The new company is happy to head off any potential nuisance lawsuits ahead of time). Both companies often end up with credits on the film.

            However, I had a deal with a company where, when they wanted an option extension and cried poverty, we were able to negotiate a situation where, if they didn't execute the option, all rights (including the rewrites to the work they paid us for) reverted to us. We got THIS close to making that movie with a new company, too. I'm sure they would have yelled and screamed, but the contracts were very clear. So it really does depend on what you can negotiate.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

              Originally posted by sppeterson View Post
              This just seems nuts on the face of it. When a company buys another company it also buys that company's debts and obligations -- and a contract is an obligation.

              Otherwise I just make a bunch of contracts with people (in any field of business), then, when I don't want to honor them, sell my company to my buddy and he blows them all off.
              This is known as an "asset purchase;" i.e., buying the assets and leaving the debts and other obligations behind. Companies do it all the time, with varying degrees of success.

              Most contracts, however, have a clause that binds the parties' "assigns" (in this case WB, allegedly) to the obligations in the contract. From the news articles it looks like she did not plead adequate facts to support the notion that WB is an assignee of New Line, or that WB is otherwise bound by the contract between her and New Line.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

                The short answer to this thread's question: NO.

                As her attorney says (read it at the end of her blog post): "The court issued a long, detailed, and very thoughtful opinion in which it noted that we need to include more facts in our pleading relative to the relationship between Warner Bros. and New Line - that was the only issue before the court on the motion."

                Once, or if, Ms. Gerritsen's lawsuit gets decided on the merits - perhaps then it would have some significant meaning to writers. But, at this point? No.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

                  She should phone North Korea... I would! Go all Sony on their asses!
                  I heard the starting gun


                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

                    Net Points are called "monkey points" for a reason.

                    Ever heard of the "Universal Compensation Plan?"

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

                      I don't think she's got a legal leg to stand on, but if what she says is true, I hope WB does the right thing and compensates her in some way. (That's my opinion in a nutshell.)

                      Also, the judge's ruling for dismissal is actually decent reading. The defendants (WB) put forth many "exhibits" (a total of 8, I believe) to bolster their contention that the lawsuit was without merit, including info on how different the movie was compared to the book. All those documents were ignored by the judge. And I quote from the ruling, "That sh!t ain't got nuthin' to do with nuthin'." Something like that, anyways.

                      On the other hand, Gerritsen didn't offer any proof, either. This from the judgment (the judge references another case): "But the Court will not 'unlock the doors of discovery for a plaintiff armed with
                      nothing more than conclusions..."

                      Gerritsen has (now) less than 20 days to amend her complaint and come up with something other than websites and emails.

                      Deadline links to the ruling: http://deadline.com/2015/01/gravity-...en-1201363242/

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

                        Originally posted by Richmond Weems View Post
                        The defendants (WB) put forth many "exhibits" (a total of 8, I believe) to bolster their contention that the lawsuit was without merit
                        This is a 'buckshot' defense. Fire everything you've got, maybe something will work.

                        The irony here is Tess should have sued for copyright infringement right off the bat, and she should have done it during last years' Oscar campaign (for the extra press).

                        She didn't do that, of course, because she only wanted what she felt she was entitled to, and in the process of trying to be fair and equitable she screwed herself out of a lot of money.

                        That's a hard lesson.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

                          Originally posted by kintnerboy View Post
                          The irony here is Tess should have sued for copyright infringement right off the bat, and she should have done it during last years' Oscar campaign (for the extra press). .
                          But I don't think there's a copyright infringement claim to be made here. They paid her for her work. They own it.

                          It's a breach of contract issue. IF the film is made based on her work, then she's entitled to X, Y, and Z by her contract. They're claiming that they didn't make a film based on her work (which they own, and could have made if they wanted to, I believe). She's claiming they did.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

                            What would be the line of dialogue in a movie? "That's a matter for the courts to decide."
                            “Nothing is what rocks dream about” ― Aristotle

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

                              Originally posted by Ronaldinho View Post
                              But I don't think there's a copyright infringement claim to be made here. They paid her for her work. They own it.
                              There is no case.

                              But if she sued for copyright infringement, then Warner Brothers would have been forced to go to court and say "No, no, no, as the parent company of New Line, we are contractually entitled to the film rights for Gerritsen's novel.... We already own the rights."

                              At which point she could have said "Oh, so you admit you're bound by the contracts of the companies you buy out?"

                              She would have lost the frivolous case and won the legitimate one.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Writer of "Gravity" says her lawsuit affects all writers?

                                AFAIK, no on in this thread is a lawyer - everything in this thread is speculation. Might be useful to get the perspective of an entertainment lawyer.

                                For those who seem to doubt the merits of the case (which is not what is at issue in the judge's ruling) it seems to me she has a very strong case, quite similar to the successful plagiarism suit of Art Buchwald against Paramount, re Eddie Murphy's 'Coming to America' which she cites. The key concept in the judge's ruling in the 'Buchwald' case was *access*. Paramount and Murphy (through his managers) had extensive access to Buchwald's treatment. Below, I've linked a law journal article on the Buchwald case, which includes an interesting history of the concept 'net profits' in Hollywood. An excerpt re *access*:

                                "Admitting that there were differences between Buchwald's 'King for a Day' and 'Coming to America', the 'Buchwald' court observed that 'where, as here, evidence of access is overwhelming, less similarity is required."

                                In Gerritsen's case, Cuaron, the director of 'Gravity' was attached to the film almost immediately after the rights were sold to New Line in 1999, and clearly had access, not only to the book, but to the additional material she wrote under contract, although she had no awareness of his connection to the film until she was informed of it in February of 2014. Whether her involvement can rise to the 'based on' standard of Fink v. Goodson and Todman (cited in the article), in certainly merits the 'inspired by' standard of Minniear v. Tors. Aside from receiving the profit participation stipulated by her contract, this phrase would surely skyrocket the sales of her book, whose similarity to the film had already been noted by many readers.

                                For those who think it's somehow 'too late' for Gerritsen to prevail, this is rarely the case in civil law. I have a novelist friend who recently filed a successful suit against a film producer to recoup $250k in royalties from the video sales of a film made in 1978.

                                The second link here, also with an eye on the Buchwald case, is is sort of a thumbnail ethnography of the fundamentally corrupt, insider culture of Hollywood, the reasons why it's so difficult to file a successful plagiarism suit why so few are filed, and the ostracism of those who manage to win their cases rather than settling.

                                I would like to hear something from a lawyer regarding the issue of whether New Line's contract was assignable to WB in this case. I asked a non-entertainment lawyer about this, and he said there are very few instances in which both the assets and liabilities are not assumed by the surviving company in a merger.

                                http://www.cardozoaelj.com/wp-conten.../02/marcus.pdf

                                http://www.filmreform.org/sue.htm

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X