- cross-posted to:
- animation@lemm.ee
- cross-posted to:
- animation@lemm.ee
An animator has sued Disney for allegedly copying the idea for hit franchise Moana from his decades-old screenplay without his consent.
Buck Woodall filed a suit in a California federal court on Friday claiming that Disney lifted many elements of a screenplay he had written for an animated film titled Bucky.
…
Woodall initially sued Disney last year but a California court ruled in November that his filing had come too late and dismissed it. The release of Moana 2 allowed the animator to sue the production giant anew, on the same basis.
The suit alleges a “fraudulent enterprise that encompassed the theft, misappropriation and extensive exploitation of Woodall’s copyrighted materials” on part of former Mandeville Films development director Jenny Marchick, now head of development at DreamWorks Animation.
The suit states that Woodall gave Marchick a screenplay and trailer for Bucky in 2003 and was then asked for more materials over the next few years, including character designs, production plans, budgets, and storyboards. Woodall claims he delivered “extremely large quantities of intellectual property and trade secrets” for projects titled Bucky and Bucky the Wave Warrior and was told by Marchick she would get the film greenlit.
“Disney’s Moana was produced in the wake of Woodall’s delivery to the defendants of virtually all constituent parts necessary for its development and production after more than 17 years of inspiration and work on his animated film project,” the suit states.
It also points out alleged overlaps between Bucky and Moana 2.
Both are set in an ancient Polynesian village and follow teenagers who set out on a dangerous voyage to save their land, and meet ancient spirits who manifest as animals on their journey.
The suit specifically points out details like the rooster and pig companions, a meeting with the Kakamora warrior tribe, a whirlpool that leads to a portal as all being lifted from the screenplay of Bucky.
Attorneys don’t just file a suit because their client said so: they generally need to be shown there’s an actionable case with a chance if winning, and in this case it probably took a lot of time and information gathering to get to that point. Also, it’s Disney, which probably makes most attorneys extra cautious.
Man, I used to believe that.
The last 8 years have shown me otherwise.
Sorry, I should have specified good attorneys, not assclowns who are working double time to get disbarred and censured. 🤣
Is 8 years a reasonable time for that? I’m genuinely asking. Assuming he had no reason to act before the first movie, as a layman, that seems like a long time to prepare for.
IANAL, I just read legal blogs from time to time, so take this as a simple blanket explanation. Without details of the case it’s hard to say. IP law gets insanely complex. It’s also very likely that this animator was told the case was not actionable by an attorney some years ago, but then talked to a someone else with a different legal opinion more recently. Then there’s the cost of litigation, which will be extreme given this is Disney, so it probably took time to get the money together for a retainer, and financial risk of a loss and counter-suit makes it risky.
That’s a good point too.