Slashdot Mirror
Pixar/Disney in "Monsters Inc" Ownership Scuffle
blamanj writes "According to a SF Chronicle story this morning, Pixar has been sued by artist Stanley Mouse. Mouse created a movie treatment titled "Excuse My Dust", which was set in "Monster City," where the animated monster characters worked for the "Monster Corporation of America." One of the characters was a a green, wisecracking, ambulatory eyeball. Furthermore, the lawsuit claims that a story artist from Pixar visited Mouse in 2000, and discussed Mouse's work."
The problem with these sorts of lawsuits is that writers, artists, etc are exposed to the same sorts of ideas (memes, if you like) and so similar stuff tends to pop up at the same time. (Like two simultaneous major movies about asteroids hitting earth a couple of years ago, etc.) Sure, sometimes it's a ripoff, sometimes it's coincidence.
..." title and all.)
The "Toy Story 2" DVD had a "sneak preview" of "Monsters, Inc" featuring Mike and Sully. The file date on the disc is Sept. 14, 2000. That clip was likely in production and preproduction for a long time before that. In time for an artist visiting Mouse to be heavily influenced by what he saw there? Maybe, but I'm doubtful.
And regarding "[t]he lawsuit claims that Disney and Pixar also appropriated the "buddy" relationship theme from Mouse's work" -- oh, please, like there's never been a prior "buddy" movie? Abbott and Costello? Hope and Crosby? Laurel and Hardy? Hello? You want to see a rip off of that (in particular, Hope and Crosby), see Dreamworks' "The Road To El Dorado". (Actually I'd call that more a tribute to, what with the "Road To
Not that I'm sorry to see Disney get a taste of their own medicine, but really...
-- Alastair
Lion King was ripped from a Manga called Jungle Taitei. (Jungle Prince?)
Lead character : kimba. (To be fair, kimba/simba/timba and some others are african words for "cub" so its not like they ripped off a made up word)
However, some of the scenes were taken too, notable the cliff outcroping scene that is on all the lion king posters.
This was a huge controversy when lion king came out, Disney totally denied, said they had never even heard of the guys. Japanese guys said "We don't care, we take it as an hommage, and we ripped off bambi for our first picture anyway". Later, disney admited that several of the main animators were big fans, and had copies of the manga at their desks while making lion king.
This was also parodied in a great simpsons episode, with Lisa's mentor, (forget the first word) gums.
Gums was played by J.E. Jones, and after he died, they did this great thing where his ghost said a few words, then Darth vader said a few words, then mufasa said "Take care kimba.. I mean simba", and then JEJ said "This is CNN".
It was hilarious, and the number of people that would get the joke is really small.
The underground comix artist R. Crumb drew the SAME green 'eyeball monster' as an alien from outer space in the mid '70s. I don't know who this Mouse character thinks he is, but unless he drew his version before 1976, HE is also in violation of copyright law. Check it out.
The real irony is that most of Disney's hits have been based on public-domain stories
(robin hood, snow white, sleeping beauty, etc), and yet Disney, by buying legislation to extend copyright terms indefinitely, are starving the public domain.
It is particularly Ironic, because the works that Disney based their works by people like Hans Christian Andersen and The Brothers Grim, were themselves derivitives of public domain works. They were tellings of folklore.
Reading from a prepared statement, a Disney spokeswoman said...
:)
I saw:
Reading from a prepaid statement, a Disney spokeswoman said...
Well, I guess it is *accurate* either way.
And I'm suprised no one brought up the charater Orbb from Quake3.
And you call yourselves geeks? {Error. Error.}
.
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
Actually this is the most valid point I've seen so far. I think it's important that we have some perspective on matters like these. Not that arguing about a Disney movie is all that important, we all know the Disney horror stories with NDAs and confining contracts etc. Nevertheless it is wise for us to not just jumpt the gun, even though past behaviour of such companies make make such jumps the most plausible ones.
With movies such as this the script and dialog are usually completed well before the animation so it would make this lawsuit look merely like someone trying to take advantage of similarities which may solely be due to coincidence.
eye no eye maid sum gram are miss steaks
When I watched Aladin, this is the first thing I thought of.
Disney, the great protector of Intellectual property rights, is also one of the greatest users of the public domain and abusers of other peoples property rights.
Go Figure.
There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
"I have to say my Eeyore voice sounds a little like Marvin (the paranoid android)."
Douglas Adams' own mother made the same connection when she was introduced to the character of Marvin. She told Douglas that he must have based Marvin on Eeyore. (Source: Don't Panic by Neil Gaiman)