- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
An animator has sued Disney for allegedly copying the idea for hit franchise Moana from his decades-old screenplay without his consent.
Buck Woodall filed a suit in a California federal court on Friday claiming that Disney lifted many elements of a screenplay he had written for an animated film titled Bucky.
…
Woodall initially sued Disney last year but a California court ruled in November that his filing had come too late and dismissed it. The release of Moana 2 allowed the animator to sue the production giant anew, on the same basis.
The suit alleges a “fraudulent enterprise that encompassed the theft, misappropriation and extensive exploitation of Woodall’s copyrighted materials” on part of former Mandeville Films development director Jenny Marchick, now head of development at DreamWorks Animation.
The suit states that Woodall gave Marchick a screenplay and trailer for Bucky in 2003 and was then asked for more materials over the next few years, including character designs, production plans, budgets, and storyboards. Woodall claims he delivered “extremely large quantities of intellectual property and trade secrets” for projects titled Bucky and Bucky the Wave Warrior and was told by Marchick she would get the film greenlit.
“Disney’s Moana was produced in the wake of Woodall’s delivery to the defendants of virtually all constituent parts necessary for its development and production after more than 17 years of inspiration and work on his animated film project,” the suit states.
It also points out alleged overlaps between Bucky and Moana 2.
Both are set in an ancient Polynesian village and follow teenagers who set out on a dangerous voyage to save their land, and meet ancient spirits who manifest as animals on their journey.
The suit specifically points out details like the rooster and pig companions, a meeting with the Kakamora warrior tribe, a whirlpool that leads to a portal as all being lifted from the screenplay of Bucky.
You must log in or register to comment.
Hard to imagine Disney not having an original idea for their films
/s x infinity
Deed them their own medicine! Hope this show how stupid copyright has become!
This kind of theft happens all the time. Proving it in court is a nightmare though, especially against Disney.
makes me think he believes he has the kryptonite
Lots of people think that and still lose.
This guy already lost his lawsuit over the original Moana
Edit: ok yeah I’m obviously mistaken
Unless you’re referring to something the article didn’t mention, you’re twisting the truth. He wasn’t allowed to bring the lawsuit - that’s not the same as losing
That was kind of a technicality, rather than on merit though.
Its hell to fuck with the Mouse
Just so tied…
I feel like this thread is full of Disney lawyers trying out arguments to help them prep
I imagined every comment being said in court, after reading yours.
Damn that was entertaining. More upvotes for Juice, please!
I do like drinking juice.
Man was waiting his whole life for this.
I’m not very versed in this but aren’t all those plot elements part of Polynesian folklore?
As far as I can tell, only Maui and the Kakamora (not as cute, little coconut people but as tricky spirits) are specifically elements of Pacific Island folklore.
Pet chickens are also pretty common in the pacific I feel like
Of course. I’m just talking about folklore as it relates to story elements. Moana isn’t an adapted fairy tale like Aladdin or Snow White.
This is pretty interesting. The claimant never pitched his movie to Disney itself, instead arguing that the exec he provided those materials to, Jenny Marchick, was “using legal loopholes to pass on his materials to Disney.” Not trying to dox anybody, but Marchick has a public LinkedIn profile and her official association with Disney is limited (she worked at the Disney Channel for four months in 2011). Otherwise, she has been employed by Mandeville Films, 20th Century Fox, Sony Pictures Animation and DreamWorks.
2003 and “over the next few years” is vague, but it roughly corresponds to when Marchick was Director of Development at Mandeville, a studio probably best known for 2008’s Beverly Hills Chihuahua–for certain definitions of “best”–although Marchick was already with Fox by that point. I’m not making any sort of judgment about the likelihood of Marchick aiding in theft of Woodall’s work based on this stuff, just putting together how it is alleged to have happened.
Yeah it’s all in proving
Woodall’s delivery to the defendants [Disney]
I want to see his trailer and screenplay from 2003.
From another article:
This is not the first time Woodall has taken legal action against Disney. A previous lawsuit regarding the first Moana film was dismissed in November last year due to the statute of limitations. However, the release of the sequel has allowed Woodall to file a new complaint.
If he had evidence of his creation being stolen, why did he wait so long? This all just seems like a cash grab or something to me. Also, $10 billion? That’s a good way to be dismissed as a fraudster.
Disney made it’s empire from stealing from the public domain. They don’t need to steal from anyone. And if they did, he probably agreed to giving it to them through a terms and conditions acknowledgment at the Disneyland Theme park in 1997 that vindicates Disney from any legal repercussions.
why did he wait so long?
Copyright laws protect 70 years after the death of the author. If Disney infringed his intellectual property, why should a couple of years matter and his case be dismissed?
stealing from the public domain
There is no such thing
Ok, sorry. They didn’t steal. They used public domain stories to make billions of dollars and used it to fight tooth and nail for their characters to not enter public domain and lengthen copyright laws for years and years.
Yup :(
Attorneys don’t just file a suit because their client said so: they generally need to be shown there’s an actionable case with a chance if winning, and in this case it probably took a lot of time and information gathering to get to that point. Also, it’s Disney, which probably makes most attorneys extra cautious.
Attorneys don’t just file a suit because their client said so: they generally need to be shown there’s an actionable case with a chance if winning
Man, I used to believe that.
The last 8 years have shown me otherwise.
Sorry, I should have specified good attorneys, not assclowns who are working double time to get disbarred and censured. 🤣
Is 8 years a reasonable time for that? I’m genuinely asking. Assuming he had no reason to act before the first movie, as a layman, that seems like a long time to prepare for.
IANAL, I just read legal blogs from time to time, so take this as a simple blanket explanation. Without details of the case it’s hard to say. IP law gets insanely complex. It’s also very likely that this animator was told the case was not actionable by an attorney some years ago, but then talked to a someone else with a different legal opinion more recently. Then there’s the cost of litigation, which will be extreme given this is Disney, so it probably took time to get the money together for a retainer, and financial risk of a loss and counter-suit makes it risky.
That’s a good point too.
Maybe he didn’t have the money to launch a suit.
That could be the case.
Nice…
I hope he gets at least two.
