Disney Being Sued Over Pirates

[Tink's Tormentor]

From TMZ.COM

Lawsuit Over "Pirates of the Caribbean"
Posted Jul 11th 2006 12:15PM by TMZ STAFF

A Hollywood screenwriter is suing pretty much everyone involved with "Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl," the first installment of the now record-breaking "Pirates" series.
Royce Mathew claims in the 80s and 90s, he "created and wrote a number of original works including drawings, screenplays, outlines, blueprints, storyboards and other original materials...which he generally entitled "SNPM," standing for 'Super Natural Pirate Movie.'"

According to the lawsuit, obtained by TMZ and filed in United States District Court, Central District of California, Royce alleges he created "various drawings depicting his pirate ship, which he named the Black Pearl, and an original design for a 'medallion,' both of which are are central elements of his screenplay." Royce says he registered the drawings and his screenplay with the U.S. Copyright Office.

Royce says the screenplay contained a blacksmith/swordsman named Will Turner, an eccentric pirate captain and a unique cursed crew whose curse was revealed only in the moonlight. Royce claims the daughter of a British governor named Elizabeth falls in love with Will Turner. In "Pirates of the Caribbean," Orlando Bloom plays Will Turner and Keira Knightley plays Elizabeth Swann, who falls in love with Will Turner.

In the lawsuit, Royce says he shopped his materials between 1991 through 1995 to various defendants, both directly and through the William Morris Agency and Creative Artist Agency. Royce claims his materials were rejected and then the first "Pirates of the Caribbean" was created, allegedly using his work as a blueprint.
The first "Pirates" movie raked in $655 million worldwide.

Royce is suing, among others, The Walt Disney Company, Buena Vista Home Entertainment, Touchstone Home Video, Jerry Bruckheimer, Inc., and Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, Inc. He is asking for unspecified damages and an injunction prohibiting the defendants from publicly displaying the movie.

Royce is also asking that all copies of "Pirates" that the defendants control be impounded.

Although the lawsuit does not mention the two "Pirates" sequels, it does ask the judge to issue an injunction against the first "Pirates" and "other infringing works."

A Disney spokewoman says the suit "has no merit."

Want to see his copyright? Go here http://www.copyright.gov/records/cohm.html and type in PA-1-204-748 under registration number.

 

[Sarangel]

OK, I'm sure I'm not the only one who'll be a *little* suspicious that the registration was 12/03 and the title of the registration was "Pirates of the Carribean." I know I'm a little cynical, but it all sounds good in the press release/news story, but copyrighting it after the movie came out seems a little weird to me...

 

[Coach Rick]

That's odd. The copyright titles his work POC, or Pirates of the Caribbean. In the article he claims to have called it Super Natural Pirate Movie, or SNPM. Yeah, what "Sarangel" said too.

 

[Tink's Tormentor]

OK, I'm sure I'm not the only one who'll be a *little* suspicious that the registration was 12/03 and the title of the registration was "Pirates of the Carribean." I know I'm a little cynical, but it all sounds good in the press release/news story, but copyrighting it after the movie came out seems a little weird to me...

I was thinking the same thing.. I mean, was this guy living under a rock for the last 3 years?

 

[Jason71]

Screamscape has been providing updates on this guy's case for months now; he had a website for a while (DisneyLawsuit.com), but all the content has been removed...not a good sign (or maybe his lawyer talked some sense into him).

He actually has a homemade movie he allegedly made to sell his pirate story--should be easy enough to determine when it was made. If he can prove it predates Pirates and that Disney saw it, he has a pretty good case. Best point he made is why call the ship "The Black Pearl" (a name supposedly in his script) when everyone knows the ship in the ride is "The Wicked Wench"? That alone could sink Disney (no pun intended) if he can prove he came up with the name.

 

[sistertrip]

His claim sounds a little far-fetched to me...

 

[Tink's Tormentor]

Screamscape has been providing updates on this guy's case for months now; he had a website for a while (DisneyLawsuit.com), but all the content has been removed...not a good sign (or maybe his lawyer talked some sense into him).

He actually has a homemade movie he allegedly made to sell his pirate story--should be easy enough to determine when it was made. If he can prove it predates Pirates and that Disney saw it, he has a pretty good case. Best point he made is why call the ship "The Black Pearl" (a name supposedly in his script) when everyone knows the ship in the ride is "The Wicked Wench"? That alone could sink Disney (no pun intended) if he can prove he came up with the name.

I think the fact that he just realized that a movie was made called Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl is proof enough he is full of sugar honey iced tea....

 

[DramaQueen]

Soooo...if he copyrighted his work under the name 'Pirates of the Caribbean' (instead of "Super Natural PIrate Movie") without Disney's permission (after all, the ride was around long before this guys film idea) couldn't Disney sue HIM for stealing thier name?

...just a question really, I don't know much about copyrights and stuff-okay i know NOTHING about that stuff. But yeah, just a thought.

 

[WDWfan36]

I was thinking the same thing.. I mean, was this guy living under a rock for the last 3 years?

exactly he would have spoke up right at the first movie not when the second one comes out

 

[The_Horned_King]

Like Disney Says no Merit:
heres the info from the copyright office:
PA-1-204-748 (COHM)
Title: POC : screenplay & story / written by Royce Mathew.
Description: 1 v.
Claimant: acRoyce Mathew , 1962-
Created: 1994

Published: 2May94

Registered: 12Dec03

Title on © Application: Pirates of the Caribbean.
Special Codes: 3/D

First of all he used POC as the title. Not Pocm like claimed in the article.

Second and more importantly it wasn't registured until dec 12th 2003. So even if disney stole it word for word it wasn't under a legal copyright and there for he's screwed. That is depending on if he can prove it was "published" on may 2nd 1994. Which unless he either has a sealed copy stamped by someone with leagal ppower from that day or before. OR a paper trail to a publisher he is again out of luck.

To Bad for him!

 

[DancingBear]

Although I think this guy is full of it, the late date of registration in itself doesn't prove anything. Copyrights run from when the work is affixed to something tangible (written down). Registration is no longer necessary. "Publishing" is also unnecessary. What he undoubtedly has is a problem of proof.

 

[catycatcat4]

omg that copy right loook at the date Registered: 12Dec03
Created: 1994
looks fake and woodent disney start working on the movie at least a yeat be for it came out may be this guy was copying disney so that he can sue them or some thing but if i dont get to see potc3 or own two and three on dvd
Royce Mathew is dead meat

 

[amy4bruce]

Every major film gets sued over plaigerism. Anybody remember the writer who sued Lucas and Spielberg over Raiders of the Lost Ark? After all, his work had an archaeologist who had a lost love, and some of the villains were German. While copyright exists even if the work is unregistered, it takes an awful lot to convince a judge that something was stolen. (Harlan Ellison, a professional and acclaimed writer, managed to do it, not once but twice.)

By the way, someone mentioned titles. My years in publishing taught me that titles are not copyrightable. You could write a novel about a tornado striking New York City and legally call it Gone With the Wind, as long as you don't try to convince people that it's Margaret Mitchell's work.

 

[Jason71]

Every major film gets sued over plaigerism.

And sometimes, like with Terminator (one of the Ellison cases) and Coming to America, the plaintiffs even win.

While copyright exists even if the work is unregistered, it takes an awful lot to convince a judge that something was stolen.

Agreed. But taking this guy at face value, in addition to a lot of the same story elements (blacksmith turned pirate, cursed Aztec gold, undead pirates), his story also had a ship named "The Black Pearl." Not the name of the ship in the ride; if the plaintiff can prove his script/home movie predates PotC, Disney wll have a hard time proving this was just a coinicidence.

I guess I am less inclined to give Disney a pass than most here, given the whole Kimba/Lion King controversy (they are lucky they did not get sued over that one) and the controversy surrounding M. Night's apparent plagerism of the plot of The Village (that story went away quickly, as if it might have been settled quietly).

 

[erikthewise]

This guy doesn't have a wooden leg to stand on. But just for the record, copyright protection (when valid) can apply to works from their creation date, not the registration date. That is works do not have to be registered immediately to be protected by copyright laws.

 

[amy4bruce]

And sometimes, like with Terminator (one of the Ellison cases) and Coming to America, the plaintiffs even win.

True. Sometimes, of course, they deserve to win. Both these cases were pretty clear cut, and (I don't know if this is a coincidence or not) both involved plaintiffs who were professional, well known writers.

The problem with someone just suing is that, not only must there be clear evidence that the ideas were their's in the first place, but they have to show that the accused had access to the ideas. David Belasco, a Broadway producer/writer/director in the late 19th, early 20th century, used to sponsor a playwriting contest for unknowns. He was constantly being sued if anyone who entered the contest saw even a resemblance to their work in a play that Belasco did. Finally, Belasco produced one of the plays, which then did a one-night double feature with the play that the amateur's author claimed ripped him off. The suit was withdrawn the next day, and Belasco closed down the contest.

Having not seen the plaintiff's script, I cannot and refuse to judge. I will say that blacksmiths turned pirates, supernatural occurrences during a pirate story, and even the name Black Pearl, are not unique ideas, and could easily occur to more than one person. However, having seen no evidence one way or the other, I'll just sit back and watch.

 

[amy4bruce]

I guess I am less inclined to give Disney a pass than most here, given the whole Kimba/Lion King controversy (they are lucky they did not get sued over that one) and the controversy surrounding M. Night's apparent plagerism of the plot of The Village (that story went away quickly, as if it might have been settled quietly).

(Sorry to do this in a second post.)

As far as the Lion King goes, heck, Shakespeare could sue because the story more than closely resembled Hamlet, which, of course, was borrowed from Saxo-Gramaticus (apologies for what has to be inaccurate spelling).

And The Village? Any story where you can predict the twist ending from a TV commercial has to be ripped off from multiple sources.