« Plundering Monday | Main | The Best Horror One Sheet... Since Saw? »
July 11, 2006
A Lawsuit About As Reliable As One Of Captain Jack's Promises
The lawsuit against Disney, et al, broken today by TMZ.com (even though it turns out to be old news), over the Pirates of the Caribbean movie is having a hard time pasing the smell test.
The claim, taking for granted all the stuff about what alleged matches there are between his work and the first Pirates film, is that between 1991 and 1995, he presented his materials and even pitched on the Disney lot. (TMZ has the filing here.)
The claim is a little blurred because he claims he presented his materials to “The Defendants,” which include the many arms of Disney, Bruckheimer, and Rossio & Elliot. It never specifies who he met with or who had what materials. Dick Cook is not named. Nina Jacobsen was not at Disney in that period. Bruckheimer’s deal with the studio – with Don Simpson – started in 1991. Simpson died in 1996. Pirates went into production in 2002.
Another bad sign for Plaintiff Royce Mathew, is the multiple references to the “eventual” registration with the copyright office. When was this stuff actually at the copyright office?
Allan Carr’s alleged involvement is also an interesting, and undeveloped, theme in the lawsuit. Plaintiff alleges that Allan Carr was involved in pitching the pirate film to Disney during that 1991-1995 period, along with William Morris and CAA. (There is no detail about who repped whom.) Carr’s last film, as a producer was in 1984 and the first Pirates film was greenlit a couple years after his death in 1999.
In a posting on a website in February 2004, Mathew lists one of his jobs as, “Allan Carr Enterprises - Production development - includes La Cage Aux Folles.” That would place him in Carr’s crowd in 1983.
But it gets weirder.
Mr. Mathew’s lead attorney is the 3-lawyer Melbourne, FL firm, Hayworth and Chaney, fling the suit, says on their website:
Hayworth and Chaney P.A. are experienced and dedicated attorneys ready to assist you in the areas of:
• Personal Injury
• Physical Injury
• Medical Malpractice
• Worker's Compensation
• Wrongful Death
• Automobile Accidents
• Boating Accidents
• Pedestrian
• Dog Bites
• Intellectual Property
• Copyright Protection
• Trademark Protection
Their order, not mine.
Hayworth & Chaney came aboard in March of this year. (We know because they sent out this press release.) It turns out that Mathew filed the suit himself in January 2005.
(There is an L.A. based firm involved now, Duane Morris LLP, a massive law firm of over 600 lawyers nationwide. Duane Morris does not list entertainment or any film-related industry as one of the industries it covers. But one of the attorneys, J Robert Renner, apparently worked on a motion picture library rights case involving Carolco in “highly successful state-court litigation against a domestic video distributor in a dispute over participation accounting.”)
In February 2005, a local station, WESH, did a story on Mr. Mathew. At that point, he was alleging that Disney has stolen the idea from a movie that he made with friends. He was claiming that he “gave representatives of Michael Eisner a copy of his movie but never got anywhere.”
There is no mention of Eisner or any movie he made in the current lawsuit.
Also on the 2004 website posting (bolds added by me): “I claim Disney has apparently stolen my intellectual properties, which include unique and original story, concepts, characters and designs for their Pirates of the Caribbean feature film and three additional released Disney related projects.
I claim Disney has apparently stolen my unique creations, story, concepts and characters and they have apparently appeared in a total of four related Disney's projects at the same time, including Pirates of the Caribbean feature film.
I have physical evidence to support my claims. This evidence includes documents and published audio/visual product.”
Anything is possible and it is certainly not beneath a studio to steal an idea. But one of the first tests of a story being true is consistency and this one wobbles like an old shoe on a cobblestone street.
There are so many pieces of this story that don’t seem to match up, I could only be convinced that there is any real truth to this if there is a lot more specific and Disney-case-damaging information forthcoming.
Posted by poland at July 11, 2006 02:43 PM
Comments
I think this quote from Blade will suffice:
"Some motherfuckers are always trying to ice-skate uphill."
That, and good luck.
Posted by: Aladdin Sane
at July 11, 2006 03:12 PM
Please tell me this wasn't the guy who came up with the original ideas for Sky High or Eight Below... because he should get thrown in jail for that.
Posted by: EDouglas
at July 11, 2006 04:40 PM
Eight Below was a remake of the 1980s Japanese movie Antarctica.
Posted by: jeffmcm
at July 11, 2006 04:47 PM
this does feel like old news, or at least not surprising since every time there's a smash hit you've got one of these nutty screenwriter lawsuits. Which isn't to say it's meritless, but last I checked bears shit in the woods. A few years ago I spent quite a bit of time on the Wordplayer website of Ted Elliot and Terry Rossio. If there's a pair of screenwriters less likely to rip off a script I'd like to meet em.
Posted by: martin
at July 11, 2006 06:04 PM
No wonder Bob Iger didn't mention Elliot and Rossio by name in his company-wide congratulatory email today that managed to mention just about every other major player involved with the movie. He knew the real screenwriter was about to get his due.
It all makes sense now.
Posted by: RDP
at July 11, 2006 08:57 PM
when I read this on IMDb I laughed out loud. It's like how that guy sued Dan Brown for stealing his idea just as the movie was about to come out.
Where was this man 3 years ago?
Posted by: KamikazeCamelV2.0
at July 12, 2006 07:43 AM
The answer's obvious: potential litigants wait for the movie to open. After all, nobody's gonna sue a flop.
Posted by: Cadavra
at July 12, 2006 09:52 AM
Clearly Royce Matthew doesn't want to work in Hollywood ever again.
Posted by: palmtree
at July 12, 2006 09:57 AM
If you noticed Dave's link on the main page to the Rossio/Elliot site, this lawsuit was brought about over a year ago and was discussed then (Feb 2005 to be exact). There's nothing "breaking" news about this.
Posted by: Martin at July 12, 2006 11:40 AM
I only know of this story through Defamer, but I just read that Disney is cutting its production slate from around 18 films a year to around 8, and concentrating on only using the Disney brand, cutting down its Touchstone wing. Sounds like more bad news for the 'middle class' of films.
Posted by: jeffmcm
at July 12, 2006 12:20 PM
Tthe original came out in 2003... why sue in 2005?
Posted by: KamikazeCamelV2.0
at July 12, 2006 09:48 PM
This lawsuit has more problems than you can shake a stick at, starting with a 3-year statute of limitations that would have started to run well before the movie was released, IMO. Obviously another guy hoping for a quick settlement, but I hope the studio sticks to their guns (swords?) on this one. It's very nearly preposterous on its face.
Posted by: Lynn
at July 13, 2006 03:19 PM
AP picked up the story yesterday. Fark links to its on the Entertainment page with a Scary tag . . .
Yarrrrrr I'm a stealin' yer script, matey, so prepare to be boarded
Posted by: Chucky in Jersey
at July 15, 2006 10:38 AM
In 1994 / 1995 - Royce Mathew created and published worldwide a derivative work of his original supernatural pirate story. Royce Mathew’s published 1994 short condensed (low budget) supernatural pirate movie (sold in stores & shown at the 1995 industry E-3 trade show Los Angeles, California) features the Black Pearl pirate ship; a gold medallion on a gold chain with mystic properties - able to "summon/call" especially near the ocean; pirates who don't want anything to do with the plunder/return a treasure because they are cursed; moonlight reveals the effects of the curse the pirates endure. His story also features five main characters: the ten year old protagonist who takes the gold in the opening scene & the hold out of the gold medallion by the gold chain / drop it or not scene; the eccentric pirate; the blacksmith; the evil pirate captain who is cursed; the apple/hunger scene between the protagonist and the evil pirate captain involving the gold medallion on the gold chain; and the one eye comic relief pirate. In the opening scene, the young protagonist takes a piece of gold from the shipwreck victim, thus becomes a thief, and sets the story in motion. The one eye pirate then comes after the gold piece. Number of times "to the Black Pearl" is said in Royce Mathew's 1994 supernatural pirate movie - Twice. Number of times "to the Black Pearl" is said in Disney's 2003 supernatural pirate movie - Twice. There is much, much more. ***
Royce Mathew’s numerous years working in the entertainment industry included meetings and pitches with Creative Artists Agency CAA, William Morris Agency, Paramount Pictures, Disney and Hanna Barbera. Credits include low budget indie “B” films, studio films and Broadway. ***
FYI: Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio are the key credited writers on Pirates of the Caribbean film franchise. A few quotes and items of interest as originally filed in Federal Court 2005 ***
Terry Rossio: “I hope you don't think this town is fair. Your ideas will get stolen. Your work will get bastardized. Even film-makers you admire will screw you over, if they get the chance.” “This is a town of rich white males for rich white males.” ***
Terry Rossio "I’ve always been jealous and somewhat resentful of writers who always talk about being in the zone; for me it was always one excruciatingly difficult word after another. I’ve never not had writer’s block (laughs). It’s nice I can’t get writer’s block because I’m always in that space.” (2003) ***
Terry Rossio: “If anyone wants to run an idea for a movie past me, I'm always willing to listen to short pitches, looking for that next great filmic concept." "But who wouldn't want to receive that next great blockbuster movie idea, and be a part of helping it along? One solution is to disingenuously suggest that people only send us the really great ideas. Ha.” “500 S. Buena Vista Street Animation 1D-2 Burbank, California 91521"- (Ted Elliot & Terry Rossio’s website - www.wordplayer.com which used this Disney address in 2004, after using a Dreamworks address) ***
Terry Rossio: "Panic. Struggle. Hopelessness. Etc. To me, that's simply what writing is. I have always hated the actual act of writing, I have always found it excruciatingly painful, and I can honestly say I've never enjoyed a single second of it. Writing one word is hard, and takes a psychic toll. Putting a second word down is twice as hard. And an entire sentence is pure torture. Or, to look at it another way, I've never experienced the opposite feeling; that ‘flow’ that so many writers refer to. “ (1997 / 2004 - Wordplayer) ***
Ted Elliott: "The one that I count as an attempt to do a real pirate movie was “Swashbuckler”, from Universal. This movie has a great cast and a really solid story, but looks like it was shot on a budget for like a two-hour episode of Fantasy Island. In a lot of ways, the tone we were going for was the tone of that script. That movie starts with the hanging of a pirate, and our movie ends with the hanging of a pirate. And that’s our little homage.” (Ted Elliott indirectly revealed where they got the new ending for Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean movie - and justifies it by calling it a homage - *compare both hanging scenes available on DVD) ***
Prior to directing Pirates of the Caribbean Curse of the Black Pearl, Gore Verbinski directed The Ring, which was augmented / exploited / copied / remake of the (low budget) Japanese movie "RINGU".
Posted by: moose11
at July 30, 2006 10:08 AM
All of that - wel, most of it - is interesting, Moose. But does it prove anything.
The closing shot at Verbinski for making a DreamWorks project that was an official remake of Ringu is the kind of truly irrelevant comment that makes the whole thing seem silly. And writers bitching about writers block is not exactly evidence of theft.
There are many circumstances under which I would be more sympathtic to Mr. Matthew's claims. But it seems pretty iffy (at best) about now.
Posted by: David Poland
at July 30, 2006 02:42 PM
at www.disneylawsuit.com - see photo proof of Royce Mathew's lawsuit regarding Pirates of the Caribbean, with photo & documented proof, and key details pinpointing the Walt Disney Company’s deliberate fraud and certain corruption, which includes this publicly traded company having intentionally concocted facts and lies with which to continue to financially profit, escape all accountability and purposely alter the court, it’s shareholders and the public’s perception of the truth. www.disneylawsuit.com
Posted by: moose11
at August 4, 2008 04:32 AM
at www.disneylawsuit.com - see photo proof of Royce Mathew's lawsuit regarding Pirates of the Caribbean, with photo & documented proof, and key details pinpointing the Walt Disney Company’s deliberate fraud and certain corruption, which includes this publicly traded company having intentionally concocted facts and lies with which to continue to financially profit, escape all accountability and purposely alter the court, it’s shareholders and the public’s perception of the truth. www.disneylawsuit.com
Posted by: moose11
at August 4, 2008 04:33 AM
We are here to provide you with best available lawyers & their suggestions which would help you out in any of your legal issues. For more information visit our website.....
========================================
linda
attorney
Posted by: linda choi
at December 15, 2009 03:36 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)