Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Disney Facing VFX Firm's Injunction Bid on Three Blockbuster Films (hollywoodreporter.com)

Posted by msmash on from the hot-water dept.

From a report: 'Guardians of the Galaxy,' 'Avengers: Age of Ultron' and 'Beauty and the Beast' are now under the microscope for use of facial capture technology. Upping the stakes over a technology called "performance motion capture," Rearden LLC is going after The Walt Disney Company in a lawsuit filed this week. The plaintiff, a firm incubated by Silicon Valley entrepreneur Steve Perlman, is demanding an injunction prohibiting Disney from distributing Guardians of the Galaxy, Avengers: Age of Ultron and Beauty and the Beast. The new lawsuit comes a year after Rearden scored a startling injunction against two Chinese firms that purchased allegedly stolen technology known as MOVA, which was being licensed by Digital Domain 3.0. At the time, some legal observers were reading the ruling as notice to Hollywood studios that the facial motion capture technology was out of play. According to Rearden's latest lawsuit in California federal court, Disney didn't listen. "Disney used the stolen MOVA Contour systems and methods, made derivative works, and reproduced, distributed, performed, and displayed at least Guardians of the Galaxy, Avengers: Age of Ultron, and Beauty and the Beast, in knowing or willfully blind violation of Rearden Mova LLC's intellectual property rights."

6 of 95 comments (clear)

  1. Messed up IP laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    America deserves what it's going to get. Since when does using a program grant the author of said programs rights on works produced by said program? Sure, maybe Disney is liable for using unlicensed copy(ies), in which case they need to be penalized for doing so - according to the number of unlicensed copies used. However the author does not automatically acquire rights on original works produced with said program. The author of a word processor does not get royalties on the book you wrote, the owner of a paint gun does not get royalties on the building you painted and the inventor of a car does not get a share of the prize you won in the stock car race. Of course in America, everything is different. So I expect American courts to fuck up IP law even further, so that the whole world can be fucked into one party suing the other party forever and nothing ever getting done.

    1. Re:Messed up IP laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But Disney MADE those IP laws so dumb. They should reap the whirlwind.

    2. Re:Messed up IP laws by thaylin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Who says they are claiming any ownership rights? They are getting an injunction from them using their technologies to create the film, until they are paid for their use of the technologies. this is no different then you creating a processor and me putting putting it in computers and selling those computers.

      I am typically critical of IP laws but this seems pretty cut and dry.

      To use your analogy:

      "The author of a word processor does not get royalties on the book you wrote"

      If the word processor application was stolen then the author would be liable for theft and the works he written possibly not sell able until that is settled.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    3. Re:Messed up IP laws by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No. They are trying to hijack the ownership rights of works created using software. If this passes legal muster, the implications are very ugly. Like "copyrights on APIs" kind of ugly.

      Not really. They are saying Disney used a stolen device to produce those works and thus they are not entitled to distribute any of the resulting products. They don't claim to own the product, just that Disney should not be allowed to benefit from their actions until the issue is resolved. To use a car analogy, If I get a sale Ford fender stamping machine and started to sell fenders Ford would get an injunction to stop that. Just because this is a software product doesn't make the idea any different.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    4. Re:Messed up IP laws by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They are trying to hijack the ownership rights of works created using software.

      Just repeating the claim doesn't make it right. Even if the injunction succeeds and monetary damages are awarded, the ownership of the films will still be in the clutches of Disney. Disney owns the films, it is just that they won't be able to distribute them (temporarily).

      If this passes legal muster, the implications are very ugly. Like "copyrights on APIs" kind of ugly.

      No, this isn't a precedent-setting case. It is quite normal for injunctions preventing the sale of offending products to be sought during legal cases.

  2. Re:complicated... by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Both Perlman and LaSalle have been screwed over here, and they both deserve some of the blame for this. Neither one appears to have understood how to commercialize the technology. They were good friends, but they were not able to separate the ups and downs of friendship from their business relationship.

    Thanks for that info that the Hollywood Reporter has a series on this (I didn't quote that part of your post to save space). Yeah, from reading the article this seemed to me to be more about spillover from the Perlman vs. LaSalle case than "Disney stole my stuff because they are EVIL!" Disney has a really good legal team so my guess is that Perlman gets paid off, but nowhere near close to what he thinks he'll get, and everything is resolved confidentially. Probably won't be in his best interests to fight this in court and potentially end up with a ruling that he doesn't own squat and on top of that he just ran up a gigantic legal bill.