lawsuits: Celebs Rumors

+54

‘The Batman’ plot wasn’t stolen as judge hits writer who sued with copyright infringement

didn’t steal the plot for its 2022 blockbuster “The Batman” from a writer who created a story about the Caped Crusader three decades earlier, a federal judge in Manhattan ruled on Wednesday.US District Judge Paul Engelmayer also said the writer Christopher Wozniak infringed copyrights belonging to DC Comics, which employed him as a freelance artist in 1990 when he wrote “The Ultimate Riddle,” later retitled “The Blind Man’s Hat.”“We respectfully disagree with the court’s decision and are considering our next steps,” Wozniak’s lawyer, Terry Parker, said in an email.Wozniak claimed he was “stunned” to learn that “The Batman” was a near copy of “The Ultimate Riddle,” with the Riddler terrorizing a Gotham City beset by crime and controlled by a corrupt banking cartel.But in a 45-page decision, Engelmayer said Wozniak intentionally and without consent lifted material from DC Comics’ works to create his story, which “liberally exploits –indeed, is rife with” Batman characters and plot elements.“The story’s use of the Batman character and the surrounding protected elements is an act of clear and blatant copyright infringement,” the judge wrote.Engelmayer also said key similarities between the works — serial killers who are loners bent on destroying society, villains who taunt pursuers with “clues and riddles,” and moments of “clarity or epiphany” that propel villains to crime — were too commonplace to support Wozniak’s copyright claim.For the latter, the judge in a footnote cited movies including “Star Wars: Episode III — Revenge of the Sith,” where Anakin Skywalker succumbs to the dark side of the Force and becomes Darth Vader.Engelmayer also rejected Wozniak’s “wholly speculative” claim for how Warner Bros might have gotten
nypost.com

All news where lawsuits is mentioned

nypost.com
‘The Batman’ plot wasn’t stolen as judge hits writer who sued with copyright infringement
didn’t steal the plot for its 2022 blockbuster “The Batman” from a writer who created a story about the Caped Crusader three decades earlier, a federal judge in Manhattan ruled on Wednesday.US District Judge Paul Engelmayer also said the writer Christopher Wozniak infringed copyrights belonging to DC Comics, which employed him as a freelance artist in 1990 when he wrote “The Ultimate Riddle,” later retitled “The Blind Man’s Hat.”“We respectfully disagree with the court’s decision and are considering our next steps,” Wozniak’s lawyer, Terry Parker, said in an email.Wozniak claimed he was “stunned” to learn that “The Batman” was a near copy of “The Ultimate Riddle,” with the Riddler terrorizing a Gotham City beset by crime and controlled by a corrupt banking cartel.But in a 45-page decision, Engelmayer said Wozniak intentionally and without consent lifted material from DC Comics’ works to create his story, which “liberally exploits –indeed, is rife with” Batman characters and plot elements.“The story’s use of the Batman character and the surrounding protected elements is an act of clear and blatant copyright infringement,” the judge wrote.Engelmayer also said key similarities between the works — serial killers who are loners bent on destroying society, villains who taunt pursuers with “clues and riddles,” and moments of “clarity or epiphany” that propel villains to crime — were too commonplace to support Wozniak’s copyright claim.For the latter, the judge in a footnote cited movies including “Star Wars: Episode III — Revenge of the Sith,” where Anakin Skywalker succumbs to the dark side of the Force and becomes Darth Vader.Engelmayer also rejected Wozniak’s “wholly speculative” claim for how Warner Bros might have gotten
nypost.com
Federal court revives lawsuit against Nirvana over 1991 ‘Nevermind’ naked baby album cover
man who appeared naked as a 4-month-old on the cover of Nirvana’s 1991 album “Nevermind.”Spencer Elden’s lawsuit against the grunge rock group alleges that he has suffered “permanent harm” as the band and others profited from the image of him underwater in a swimming pool, appearing to grab for a dollar bill on a fish hook.The suit says the image violated federal laws on child sexual abuse material, although no criminal charges were ever sought.A federal judge in California threw out the lawsuit last year but allowed Elden to file a revised version, which the judge later dismissed on grounds that it was outside the 10-year statute of limitations of one of the laws used as a cause of action.Thursday’s decision by a three-judge panel of the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in California reversed that ruling and sent the case back to the lower court.The appellate panel found that each republication of an image “may constitute a new personal injury” with a new deadline and cited the image’s appearance on a 30th-anniversary reissue of “Nevermind” in 2021.“The question whether the ‘Nevermind’ album cover meets the definition of child pornography is not at issue in this appeal,” the court wrote, according to the New York Times.In an email to The Associated Press, Nirvana attorney Bert Deixler called the ruling a “procedural setback.”“We will defend this meritless case with vigor and expect to prevail,” he wrote.The Associated Press does not typically name people who say they have been victims of sexual abuse unless they come forward publicly, as Elden has.
nypost.com
Prince Harry wins damages over phone-hacking by UK newspapers
appeared as the star witness at the trial in June – had sued Mirror Group Newspapers, the publisher of the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and Sunday People.Harry and about 100 other claimants – including actors, sports stars, celebrities and people who simply had a connection to high-profile figures – have taken legal action over allegations of phone-hacking and unlawful information-gathering between 1991 and 2011.Harry said he was targeted by MGN for 15 years from 1996 and that more than 140 stories which appeared in its papers were the result of unlawful information gathering, though the trial only considered 33 of these.“I found that 15 out of the 33 articles that were tried were the product of phone hacking of his mobile phone or the mobile phones of his associates, or the product of other unlawful information gathering,” Judge Timothy Fancourt said.“I consider that his phone was only hacked to a modest extent, and that this was probably carefully controlled by certain people at each newspaper.”The judge concluded there had been widespread hacking and unlawful activities at the paper of which senior executives were aware, although nearly all those on the board of the company had not been told.MGN, owned by Reach had argued the accusations were not supported by the evidence.“We welcome today’s judgment that gives the business the necessary clarity to move forward from events that took place many years ago,” an MGN spokesperson said.“Where historical wrongdoing took place, we apologize unreservedly, have taken full responsibility and paid appropriate compensation.”
DMCA