Slashdot Mirror


Lucas Loses Star Wars Stormtrooper Copyright Case

An anonymous reader writes "A prop designer who made the original Stormtrooper helmets for Star Wars has won his copyright battle with director George Lucas over his right to sell replicas. The five-year saga, which ended in the highest court in the land, has stakes of galactic proportions."

11 of 325 comments (clear)

  1. So goes a once-talented filmmaker by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This may be hard for a lot of younger people to believe, but there was actually a time in Hollywood when George Lucas was considered an incredible up-and-coming young director. Coming off of American Graffiti, a lot of people were thinking he would be the next Francis Ford Coppola. He was widely regarded as being in the same league (maybe an even better one) as Martin Scorsese coming off Mean Streets.

    But then the greed got him. An afterthought merchandising deal on Star Wars meant that his big money-maker from that point on was toys and merchandise, not movies. He stopped directing and let his best years pass him by. The ten-year-rule for directors is that, give or take, most directors have about 10 years of truly creative energy. And with the mountain of money he was sitting on from toys, he just sat back and let his expire. Now we'll never know what he might have done if he had to struggle, if he had kept working.

    That's a great lesson for you young creative types out there. Careful what you wish for.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:So goes a once-talented filmmaker by redemtionboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ehhh, I don't think it has anything to do with greed. I think it has to do with that George Lucas is a great producer but a horrible director. Any director that says "I don't like the talking parts" should never be a director. If you think he is any different now than he was then, all you need to do is look at the original script to Empire Strikes Back. which features Darth Vader's subterranean castle with gargoyles and lava and that Luke's real father wasn't Darth Vader nor was Leia his sister. The thing that kept Lucas under control wasn't less licensing, it was smaller budget constraints and a lack of a team of yes men. No one dare tell Lucas that anything he did with Episodes I-III was garbage, He had a blank check to make the movies and a team telling him he could do no wrong. I couldn't expect anything different to happen.

    2. Re:So goes a once-talented filmmaker by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      His failure was in never coming even close to living up to his creative potential.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    3. Re:So goes a once-talented filmmaker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      American Griffiti sucked. Lucas was always total fail.

      Agreed. I never saw what the big deal was. I could barely stay awake while watching it.

      Star Wars was such a huge hit because of timing and his special effects. I remember back then - there wasn't anything like it before: special effects is what made it.

      He's all special effects and no story. The last Star Wars made, it was all: Anakin turns completely evil, fight, Anakin kills, Yoda says something trite, pseudo Zen like and backwards, Palpatine says something trite and "evil", fight, more fighting, and Anakin dressed as Vader.

      Tada! Star Wars III.

      Isn't there a Perl script that writes Star Wars scripts?!

    4. Re:So goes a once-talented filmmaker by Chucky_M · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Plinkett covered this in detail via http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/ His reviews were easily the best thing about episode 1-3, GL is a great business man and nobody will take that away from him but he is the Microsoft of the film world.

    5. Re:So goes a once-talented filmmaker by JosKarith · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I agree that 1-3 were a terrible disappointment. They were a perfect opportunity to paint a horrific personal slide as an idealistic young man with the galaxy laid out before him becomes everything he hates becuase of hubris.
      Instead we got Meesa, younglings and _every_ lightsaber duel ending with hands chopped off. Screw you Lucas. I could have eaten a bowl of alphabet soup and shat a better plot than that.
      Let it go. Star Wars isn't your baby any more. Your combination of control freakery and abuse have destroyed any love that might have once existed for you. Go back to counting your huge pile of money - we all know that's all you're capable of loving now.

      --
      'Don't worry' said the trees when they saw the axe coming, 'The handle is one of us.'
    6. Re:So goes a once-talented filmmaker by multisync · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The ten-year-rule for directors is that, give or take, most directors have about 10 years of truly creative energy.

      Lolz ...

      Well, I guess someone better tell Scorsese, Eastwood, Woody Allen, David Lynch, the Cohen brothers, Cronenberg, Richard Linklater, Errol Morriss, Tarantino, Paul Thomas Anderson, Ang Lee, Gus Van Sant, and Wim Wenders their careers are over.

      Oh, and considering Lucas helmed two of the most successful movie franchises of the late 20th century, while founding companies that set the standard for cinima sound (THX) and special effects (ILM), no, I'm not surprised he was considered "an incredible up-and-coming young director." Along with contemporaries like Copola and Scorsese, he has had a dramatic influence on the art and science of making movies.

      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
  2. "galactic proportions" by exabrial · · Score: 1, Insightful

    facepalm, ow

  3. Re:List of Lucas supporters by Xest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, and the UK just saw the first evidence for 10 years that in a small hidden away part of the universe, sane copyrights do exist!

    Even though this guy won, the case basically said Lucas had 15 years to monetise the design, and since then this guy, who moulded the original helmets, may now make some money off that having seemingly made fuck all from the original billions the Star Wars franchises netted Lucas and friends.

    All in all, it seems like a decent outcome. Lucas got to make his money from story telling and directing, this guy got to make money from his talent- creating props. Is that such a bad thing? Should Lucas really have been able to make money on even the bits he was talentless at? Even there he had 15 years to do so it would seem!

  4. I have mixed feelings about it. by gfxguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have mixed feelings about it, but I like the way the decision went. I think the "implied contract" BS is just that... BS. That this ruling might "hurt" artists in Britain because movie makers will not want to use them is also BS - all they have to do is have, you know, an ACTUAL contract.

    That what this artist is doing is "piracy" is also BS... he's actually making physical objects... the same physical objects he created over 30 years ago. Calling it piracy is like a record label calling their own artists pirates for doing live performances, even though there was no clause in their contracts not to.

    --
    Stupid sexy Flanders.
  5. Unmitigated gall and greed by KingSkippus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You are so correct. And make money he did--during the late 70s and 80s, George Lucas and 20th Century Fox made millions off this movie. Apparently, that's not enough though, nosiree. In spite of the piles of cash in both of their respective bank accounts--and the piles of cash that are still flowing into their respective bank accounts because of the franchise--they're going to begrudge this schmo living a very modest life a few thousand dollars for physically making something that he originally designed that helped contribute those millions to their bank accounts.

    And then they have the unmitigated gall to accuse the guy of piracy--the guy who designed and built the things to begin with!

    You know, I could understand this if it was some jerk who has no relationship to Lucas or the movies making them and selling them as "Authentic Star Wars Stormtrooper Helmets," but that's clearly not the case. What should have happened is that George Lucas should have said, "You know, even if he's technically breaking copyright law, I'm going to give this guy a pass." Or if he were worried about holding onto his IP rights (even though there's a snowball's chance in hell of him losing them if he chooses not to pursue one single guy because of personal reasons), then he should have called the guy up and said, "Hey, how about giving me a token cut of the profit of each one sold for legal reasons, like say, one penny, and you can even tell people that they're authentic and authorized by George Lucas?" Oh yeah, because that would mean that their piles of millions of dollars would be shorter by a few thousand dollars, which is antithetical to the principle of being so damn greedy that it's not enough that you succeed, but everyone else must fail.

    Watching the Star Wars is one of the most cherished memories of my childhood, and I've always wanted to share those movies with kids growing up today. This crap makes me sick, though. It makes me wish that I had never seen the damn movies to begin with and stop sharing them with other people.

    Personally, I wish that they would restore the copyright length here in the U.S. back to its original 28 years. 28 years seems like plenty to make money off of your creation, and making it any longer stifles creativity and innovation of others and takes away from the public domain that which belongs in it. I know this case took place in Britain, and I wish that they would enforce a similar copyright period, which would have made this whole case a non-issue. The way I'm reading the article, although the outcome was fair to Mr. Ainsworth, it's still not a best-case scenario. He really only scraped by because the court found that his creation was an "industrial prop," not a work of art. Still, whatever, I'm glad the guy won.