Comments on: How a motion picture that is running for nine Oscars can be sued for copyright infringement

By: free auto approved scrapebox lists

free auto approved scrapebox lists — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 07:28:31 +0000

There are certainly quite a lot of particulars like that to take into consideration. That could be a nice level to bring up. I offer the ideas above as common inspiration but clearly there are questions like the one you convey up the place the most important thing might be working in trustworthy good faith. I don?t know if best practices have emerged round issues like that, however I am certain that your job is clearly recognized as a good game. Each boys and girls feel the affect of only a second’s pleasure, for the rest of their lives.

By: Jefferey Blandino

Jefferey Blandino — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 10:53:46 +0000

Thank you for this article I am happy to part with you, I think that everything will change, and certainly I see things from the other side,I’m from Iraq … .. only for welcome …

By: Ali

Ali — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 22:41:54 +0000

It’s Very Interesting Article And I have Enjoyed Reading it , I’m From Iraq And I can tell you that that 90% from this info is true . The Station is hard in Iraq now and as you know we had election not long ago and we all wish everything will be find soon .

By: cskwak

cskwak — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 04:26:41 +0000

I’m quite curious about this – I really loved The Hurt Locker… however, I can see where a copyright infringement claim might make sense I’d have to say from my own experience of the movie it seemed less about an individual person’s story and more about the very first words we see in the film, that “war is a drug.”

In that respect, I think the (c) infringement claim is pretty weak – after reading the Mark Boal article and comparing it with the movie, there seem to be very general similarities. In a lot of respects, the movie is just like any other war movie and aspects of the Jeremy Renner character (like his being confounded by a supermarket) seem quite deviant from the way Sarver appears in that article. Furthermore, the screenplay was deemed an “Original Screenplay” (hence it’s win in that category on Sunday night).

If it hadn’t been brought up in this lawsuit, I doubt that the average person would make a connection between the film’s events and Sarver’s events based on Boal’s published articles of Sarver/EOD/his time as an embedded reporter.

By: JoAnna

JoAnna — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 03:32:03 +0000

When you say that The Hurt Locker infringes on Sgt, Sarver’s “personal copyright” I think you are referring to his life rights. We’ve covered this in another class I’m taking (Legal Aspects of the Entertainment Industry). I haven’t seen the movie yet, but if The Hurt Locker does indeed tell Sgt. Sarver’s life story, then he may have a case against them. I’m not sure if they would have needed to secure his life rights. If the story is based on the article written by Boal (who I assume was given permission by Sarver to write the article in the first place), then life rights for the film may not have needed to be secured. I’m sure Sgt. Sarver is just looking for a piece of the pie, considering he could have gotten some cash for selling his story. However, it might be too late for that. If he gave Boal permission to write the article, then I believe Boal had the right to create the screenplay and sell it to the studio.

By: Taylor

Taylor — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 19:45:54 +0000

I’ve not seen Avatar (I know, where have I been?), but many of the comments I’ve heard liken it to Pocohontas, Fern Gully, and Dances with Wolves.

However, according to this article, Avatar was “80% similar” to Tale of the Blue Crows. If true, that’s a pretty substantial portion!

But then again…blue aliens in a foreign landscape aren’t exactly a unique concept, are they?

It’s no secret that a lot of the same basic themes get used over and over again, so how unique does a film have to be?

By: anthonydiionno

anthonydiionno — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 18:26:46 +0000

It will be interesting to see how this case plays out, albeit not a copyright case. I don’t see how Sgt. Sarver will be able to make valid claims of his story being stolen and his likeness being used, unless there is written proof somewhere. I am not too familiar with the intricacies of the military, but it seems that The Hurt Locker camp is trying to claim that their story is loosely based around the standard duty of military personnel and not solely Sarver’s. On the other hand, if there were certain promises made to Sarver, the Hurt Locker camp could be liable.

By: ChelseaLo

ChelseaLo — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 04:03:47 +0000

I read about this lawsuit against James Cameron also. I think the problem with this is that the story isn’t original. Avatar has received a lot of criticism for being similar to Pocahontas and I just don’t see how such simple plot elements could be copyrighted. I think Cameron obviously showed a lot of originality in his execution of the film. I guess we’ll see!

By: Alena

Alena — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:36:27 +0000

Well then how about this one for an example of the creators of a movie can get sued for copyright infringement:

A science fiction writer, Zhou Shaomou has filed a lawsuit against Avatar for copyright infringement, saying that 80% of “Avatar”’s key elements and plot are the same as his novel, “Tale of the Blue Crows.”

That’s really disappointing! I loved this movie and thought it was so original!! Here’s the article: http://www.examiner.com/x-19663-LA-Legal-Examiner~y2010m3d7-Chinese-writer-files-copyright-lawsuit-over-Avatar

By: Evan

Evan — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 17:15:23 +0000

The plaintiffs aren’t making a copyright claim here; the complaint alleges “misappropriation of name and likeness; invasion of privacy; breach of contract; infliction of emotional distress; fraud; and negligent misrepresentation.” All perfectly valid causes of action, but none of them are about copyright, i.e. Sarver’s rights to some tangible embodiment of his own original expression. The word “copyright” doesn’t seem to appear in the complaint at all.

You guys are free to discuss other causes of action like these that sometimes come up in the same case as claims of copyright infringement, but you need to be careful not to conflate them. It’s one thing to ponder whether or not Sarver could have a copyright claim here, but it’s another (problematic) thing to say he already asserted one when he didn’t. Especially when you title a post like this one.