Jump to content
BobbyO

Matilda

Recommended Posts

Drew

Bill-

If AE tried to profit from the film you posted stills from, would that not infringe on George Lucas' ownership of that Chewbacca brand?

He would need to license the use of that costume would he not?

Edited by Drew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Bill-

If AE tried to profit from the film you posted stills from, would that not infringe on George Lucas' ownership of that Chewbacca brand?

He would need to license the use of that costume would he not?

Plus.

Good point Drew. I cant imagine anyone wanting to go down that worm hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Orygun

Bill-

If AE tried to profit from the film you posted stills from, would that not infringe on George Lucas' ownership of that Chewbacca brand?

He would need to license the use of that costume would he not?

Lucasfilm has been very lenient on the use of the Star Wars characters. Disney, on the otherhand might send a 7ft mouse to rough you up a bit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Drew:

The Disney people, who now own and administer the Star Wars property, would probably want to take a look at any of their proprietary property (such as Chewbacca's face) which might be used in a way they did not license or authorize, yes. And they are quite notoriously strict and forceful in defending their copyright property.

What the Disney people are very mindful of is that when they are made aware of some infringement on their property (unauthorized use), they MUST take an aggressive action to stop the infringement, because if they "let one slide", then in a subsequent court action where they try to block or punish an infringer, the defendants can point to the example of where they "let it slide" and say "they should let us slide too". If a company is careless in it's enforcement of it's proprietary and copyrighted property licenses and uses, a court may find their property has passed into public domain and they can no longer enforce claims of infringement.

Disney even got some bad press a few years back when they found out a nursury school/day care center in Florida had painted some Disney cartoon characters on the wall for cute decorations, but had never obtained a license from Disney, so the Disney people forced them to remove the artwork. Warner Brother's then stepped in and pulled a great PR thing by offering their own cartoon characters for the walls, and even hired the painters, and simply had some agreement with the people there to affirm an agreement of licensing was in force.

But bad PR for Disney aside, it showed that Disney is very determined to act on any infringement they are aware of, to insure their copyrights are never compromised.

So the sort answer is, yes, if AE does release any DVD video with the Matilda face in it, Disney will be made aware of it and I would expect they will consider some action to respond to the potential infringement of their copyright on Chewbacca. And the Disney Legal Affairs people are famously not nice. When Jim Henson was first considering selling the Henson company to them, but the negotiations ultimately fell apart, an article in Vanity Fair (I think, as I recall) described the negotiation and said that usually in business negotiations, the lawyers for one side play "good cop/bad cop" in their tactics. But the Disney legal team negotiating with Henson's team were described in this articale as playing "bad cop/anti-christ" in their negotiating strategy.

So it's not wise to do something Disney's legal affairs team would disapprove of.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

reality is that it costs money to prosecute a lawsuit - even on a contingency basis, you're liable for lawyer costs if you lose.

i'd be very surprised that a guy who can't raise funds to release his movie has the money to be litigious over breach of a NDA.

there's a lot of far-fetched IFs that would have to come to fruition for a quantifiable loss to be incurred here, and causation in these cases is very difficult to prove - it's not nearly as cut and dried as saying "I would've sold it and made a fortune if Munns hadn't opened his big mouth"

yes, people sometimes win big for a breach of confidence, but that's typically where somebody profits from their own use of protected information - i.e. if Bill took the footage and made his own movie that he sold.

i've read about 500-700 civil litigation cases a year over the last decade. I've seen this scenario come to court once in that time -- i.e. where an economic opportunity is lost because somebody broke an NDA to publicly state that the opportunity was not what it seemed. The damages awarded were $1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Bill. Why not release the whole 20 seconds of video and let everyone make their own judgements?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest nysro

Once a hoax, always a hoax. We should put little credibility into ANYONE who has been involved in a hoax before. The motive was there once to hoax, and with bigfoot being a hot topic, the potential for another hoax is ever greater. I think the community as a whole needs to stop giving press to known hoaxes and poor "evidence", Everytime you talk about a person who is trying to hoax, you feed their egos and thier drive to fool you even more. The biggest problem today with bigfooting, is people see dollars signs and not a chance to prove a life long mystery.

Edited by nysro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

BC:

The chart I released is actually my work, my comparative analysis, a part of the analysis document I made, which incorporates image property of AE, as well as image material otherwise freely available on the internet.. Releasing his entire 20 second video is something he should do, as it is 100% his property.

Plus, if I'm going to be in legal trouble, I choose not to dig the hole any deeper.

:)

Bill

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thepattywagon

I wonder if Disney will be apprised of Rick Dyer's 'Tent video'... :spiteful:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OntarioSquatch

I doubt AE would start a lawsuit over a few images. Posting an entire video might be a different story though :lol:

Edited by OntarioSquatch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×