• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Warner Bros. Facing $900 Million Lawsuit Over 'The Conjuring' Franchise

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Blue Lou

Member
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/th...00-million-lawsuit-conjuring-franchise-990107

Gerald Brittle says the horror movies infringe on his 1980 book The Demonologist, which tells the stories of paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren. In a massive 355-page amended complaint filed Wednesday in Virginia federal court, he's upping the ante against Warner Bros., New Line Productions and director James Wan, among others.

The author claims The Conjuring, The Conjuring 2 and Annabelle infringe on his exclusive rights to create derivative works based on the Warrens' cases. He says, in a 1978 agreement for his book, the couple agreed to a no "competing work" provision that is still in effect. Under it, Brittle says, the Warrens aren't allowed to make or contract any works based on the "same subject" as The Demonologist, specifically their "lives and experiences as paranormal investigators."
Click to expand...

There's more at the link but I'm trying to keep it concise.

(I await a video from Leonard French, my favourite American copyright attorney. 😜)
 
J

jurgen

Member
I really doubt Brittle is going to get nearly a billion dollars from the company that has managed to hold onto the rights to Superman after all these years.
 
N

norm9

Member
Seems cut and dry. He has exclusive rights to the Warren's stories. I imagine there will be a good payday from WB for using them.

His book is fantastic by the way if you like ghost investigations and a fan of the Warrens.
 
S

SeanC

Member
If the Warrens signed off those rights to him, including life rights and all derivative works, then yeah, he's got a major case.

The Warren estate lawyers are probably going to be sued by WB for the bill if they didn't disclose that info when they signed a development deal with them and Wan's production company. Like, how do you not know your clients signed off their rights decades ago?
 
S

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
norm9 said:
Seems cut and dry. He has exclusive rights to the Warren's stories. I imagine there will be a good payday from WB for using them.

His book is fantastic by the way if you like ghost investigations and a fan of the Warrens.
Click to expand...

I mean, assuming he could keep the rights for nearly 40 years without entering active production.
 
S

Sweeney Tom

Banned
SeanC said:
Like, how do you not know your clients signed off their rights decades ago?
Click to expand...

"It is very hard to believe that a large conglomerate such as Warner Brothers, with their army of lawyers and who specializes in intellectual property rights deals, would not have found The Demonologist book or the deals related to it, or Brittle for that matter," Henry writes, adding that the "only logical conclusion" is that defendants knew about the deals and ignored them thinking "they would never get caught."
Click to expand...
.
 
S

SeanC

Member
RustyNails said:
Isn't Ed and Lorraine stuff publicly available? Like you can read up on everything on wikipedia.
Click to expand...

Lots of things are publicly avail to see and view, but you can't pick up some book off a shelf or an article in a magazine and decide to make a movie out of it. Lots of hoops to jump through first.
 
B

BlackBanditSho

Member
norm9 said:
Seems cut and dry. He has exclusive rights to the Warren's stories. I imagine there will be a good payday from WB for using them.

His book is fantastic by the way if you like ghost investigations and a fan of the Warrens.
Click to expand...

You're right. it's a GREAT book. Listened to the audiobook after the first movie. Been craving a series of movies about The Warrens...
 
S

SeanC

Member
Sweeney Tom said:
.
Click to expand...

What I mean is the Warren's lawyers, they still have to sign off on it. So it's really a) WB and the estate knew of this older deal and went ahead with it anyways or b) The estate lawyers didn't disclose it to WB because they want more money or c) The estate lawyers are totally dumbfucks who had no idea about the rights status (maybe a new firm/lawyer who wasn't aware...who knows?)
 
N

norm9

Member
icespide said:
oh wow, guess we'll probably get a 3rd one then
Click to expand...

And then you have the second Annabelle movie coming out. Plus, whatever is in the Warren's haunted vault could be used as the focus of a spinoff. Shit, do away with the ghostly stuff and I'd watch a romance movie with Vera and Patrick.
 
S

Salty Rice

Member
sarcastor said:
You aim high. Settle for lower. You don't sue for the amount you think you can get. I learned this from many years of watching lawyer shows.
Click to expand...

I know but i wish it would be like The Price Is Right and if you are too high the judge should come and say "fuck off".
 
J

Justin Bailey

------ ------
I really hate these types of lawsuits. This asshole is in no position to make a movie based on their story. It's THEIR fucking story.
 
R

riotous

Banned
You wait to sue because you sue based on the value of the property; the best way to know the value to sue for? Let the revenue accumulate over time.

You start with a cease and desist, which proves you are actively seeking to keep the rights, then hit them with the lawsuit later to recoup what was taken.

Justin Bailey said:
I really hate these types of lawsuits. This asshole is in no position to make a movie based on their story. It's THEIR fucking story.
Click to expand...

If he owned the rights to the story, then he was in the position to sell those rights.
 
W

WordAssassin

Member
Fudgepuppy said:
Are the movies competing with the book though?

And shouldn't Lorraine be the one getting sued?
Click to expand...
I'm wondering that too, does it specify if their life rights are only for WRITTEN derivitive works, or is it for ANY works? If it's written, movies are fair game, no? But if it's any, then, whoops.

billy beane said:
If these means no more The Conjuring films then fuck that guy. But he has a legit reason though.
Click to expand...
Seriously, I need my fix dammit

icespide said:
I thought the sequel underperformed, is there even a chance at a 3rd one?
Click to expand...
Oh ho ho, there's a whole Conjuring Universe happening

Conjuring
Annabelle
Conjuring 2
Annabelle 2
The Nun
Conjuring 3

GAMEPROFF said:
It was godawful and I refuse to watch any movies out of this "universe" anymore since they have introduced actual monsters in the Conjuring 2
Click to expand...

1) What actual monster 2) there was an actual monster in the first film too? And in Annabelle?

Edit: Oh, the Crooked Man, which was just a manifestation of the demon? Conjuring had ghosts and witches, Annabelle had literal demons, but the line is a demon creating a manifestation of a child's story character to fuck with the family? That sounds snarkier than I mean it, text and all, just think it's a weird place to draw the line on this series about ghost hunters that have a room filled with haunted toys and even have a story about fighting a werewolf (which is apparently what Conjuring 3 was gonna be based on)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Phil Spencer interview - Says that their intent is for all Xbox games, including Call of Duty, to be available on Xbox Game Pass Day One
2 3
102
6K
Kenneth Haight replied
US Senators "Deeply Concerned" About Microsoft's Proposed Deal To Buy Activision Blizzard
2 3 4
164
16K
derrickchase replied
Why Microsoft and Warner Bros. Archived the Original ‘Superman’ Movie on a Futuristic Glass Disc (EXCLUSIVE)
News
5
1K
DeepEnigma replied
Ava DuVernay To Direct Jack Kirby Comic Creation ‘The New Gods’ For Warner Bros, DC
9
1K
LordPezix replied
  • Locked
Stallone is Suing Warner Bros. Over Falsifying ‘Demolition Man’ Profit Numbers
2
73
14K
jmood88 replied
Top Bottom