Posted by RocketGib in on December 28, 2003 at 1:30 AM
|
|
![]()
From the BBC:
A French children's author is suing Disney, saying the international box-office hit Finding Nemo may have been lifted from his own work. Writer Franck Le Calvez says many characters in the film look very much like those of a book he published last year, Pierrot the Clown Fish.
He is demanding a ban on any product imitating his Pierrot brand.
Disney insists Nemo was an original creation, and does not infringe any trademark or copyrights.
Mr Le Calvez says that he registered Pierrot the Clown Fish with France's copyrights body in 1995.
At the time he tried to approach French animation studios but his idea was turned down, he says.
Unsold copies
In 2002 he financed the publication of 2,000 copies of the book himself.
Mr Le Calvez says Nemo - who is also a clown fish - appears to be based on Pierrot.
"We have also found the same supporting characters, such as a surgeon fish and a cleaner shrimp," his lawyer Pascal Kamina told AFP news agency.
"The similarities are sufficiently troubling for us to ask for an explanation from Disney."
If no answer is forthcoming, Mr Kamina says, his client will press ahead with his lawsuit in France.
Mr Kamina adds that many bookstores have refused to stock the Pierrot book, because of the interest generated by Nemo-related products.
Mr Le Calvez is suing both Disney, which is distributing Finding Nemo, and the animation studio that produced the film, Pixar.
Disney, in a statement quoted by Le Monde newspaper, denies any plagiarism.
"The allegation is totally baseless - Finding Nemo is a work that belongs to Pixar and Disney and an independent creation," the statement said.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Full story
|
|
User Comments
CodeWarrior
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 11:37 AM
gotta admit, there seems to be something rotten in Denmark (or France) here...
|
fjones987
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 12:29 PM
Even if they did take the characters, the whole movie, all the animation, storyline, voicing, casting, advertising, were done all done completely seperate from his works. The only thing he could do is seek "Copyright Infringement" for the similiar characters, I don't know how much you can get for that, or judge how much you *should* get for that.
|
Accipiter777
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 1:14 PM
Disney? Stolen stories? NEVER...the next thing ya know, you'll be tell me that "Winnie The Pooh" , "Sleeping Beauty" , "Beauty and the Beast", "Peter Pan" , "Alice in Wonderland" , "Jungle Book" were not Disney's creation either.
|
Accipiter777
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 1:22 PM
"Cinderella" , "Pinocchio".
|
Accipiter777
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 1:32 PM
"Hunchback Of Notre Dame" , "Snow White" , "Pochahontas".
|
compmore
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 1:36 PM
not just stealing the charactors. if he proves that disney did base nemo off his charactors the fact that he can't sell his book because of the movie means there's damages to isn't there?
I agree Accipiter777 who would've thought Disney would steal anything (gasp in horror) after all anyone who makes children happy has to be good.......... right?? (sarcasm here  )
|
Accipiter777
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 1:55 PM
"Treasure Island", "Swiss Family Robinson", "James and the Giant Peach", "20,000 Leagues Under The Sea" ... i'll stop there..now i am not saying Disney claims to have written all those. I wonder, some poor SOB is starving somewhere thinkin to himself, "What if i had kept the idea for Mickey Mouse quiet....". like Michael Bolton, they have been riding on the backs of others for years. Compmore, whats worse is you ask a kid who wrote "Snow White" I bet they say Disney! Since we are on this, how many of you are tired of Christmas music being butchered by the RIAA. EVERYONE has one. EVERY year same music...different artist.
|
battousai99
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 2:16 PM
|
battousai99
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 2:19 PM
With that, I wouldn't be surprised if Disney did infringe on Mr Le Calvez's book. (the second link above needs to have the tag taken out at the end to work)
|
gdZiemann
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 2:30 PM
You forgot Jungle Book, Alice in Wonderland and Tarzan.
|
Accipiter777
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 2:36 PM
George, lol, i was gonna load all that up too, But there are soooo many! *cough Robin Hood *cough.
|
death123
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 2:51 PM
Disney never did claim to write many of those though, did they? I haven't researched it but i don't believe they have....
|
compmore
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 3:02 PM
I guess to them it's not stealing unless there's a copyright involved
|
ReverendLovejoy
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 3:08 PM
What real boils my blood about Disney, is that it's a company openly built upon these works from the public domain, and then as soon as Steamboat Willie gets close to entering the public domain (this Nemo question aside), they buy off congress to pass the copyright extension act, essentially freezing it for another 30 years.
Let's do a little thought experiment. If current copyright law had been applicable when the Brother's Grimm (Or the several dozen other artists they've adapted) had written their stories, guess which major corporation wouldn't have been able to build an empire based largely on their works?
|
crawdd
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 3:12 PM
Looks like the next "Kimba the White Lion King"
|
crawdd
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 3:14 PM
|
stilltrying
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 4:53 PM
Something JUST has to be done about all this PIRACY that's goino on haha These are the same people who call us theives and PIRATE"S
|
goldenpi
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 5:28 PM
I cant comment on this infringement as I have not seen the book in question. It sounds suspicious, but a coincidence of three vaguely similar characters isn't proof. Also, remember that when Disney does decide to use a past work as a base for a new movie it usually distorts it until its hardly recognisable. Compare the brothers grimm with Disneys versions, the non-history in pokehontas (unspellable) and the almost total rewrite of greek myth in hercules, to name just a few of the best known.
The disney lobbying was a 20 year extension. Ive heard it called "perpetual copyright on the installment plan".
Anyone got a spare webserver? My laptops suffering from tea-induced failure, and I use it to host my anti-DRM site.
|
tomsong
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 7:06 PM
My friend was a well-known stage composer/arranger and she had a wonderful musical version of "Frankenstein." I approaahed another friend who owned an animation company with some contract work at Disney. He said, you're crazy if you show Disney anything. They blatantly steal and laugh in your face. He mentioned that "Hunchback" came from an inhouse animator, and "Lion King" was stolen from another guy who pitched the idea.
|
independentm...
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 8:53 PM
Wouldn't suprise me at all.
Shmoo
|
churchkey
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 11:06 PM
So, does all this theivery fall under Eisner's watch, and is Walt spinning in his grave?
|
TheSherminator
|
Date: December 28, 2003 @ 11:14 PM
Ah, Disney bashing...
Thriving on other's ideas - legitimately or not. Live by piracy, die by piracy. P2P gives us access to the real authors and creators, not the hot version that Disney sells.
|
koemoejoe
|
Date: December 29, 2003 @ 5:35 AM
my best disney moment this year
bye koemoejoe
well it whas going to be the release of finding nemo my girl loves that movie and i got mad bootie for going to see it with her lmao
but then disney dsided to back out of peter pan becose thay wear unwilling to pay a childerns hospetle a few bucks
and then peter pan whas released bye
Universal, Columbia, Revolution Studios
now kids know that peter pan is not a disney movie after all it's just some thing disney likes to pay the rights to make movie about with that don't know that part but at least the message got in one form or another hehehe
|
goldenpi
|
Date: December 29, 2003 @ 1:57 PM
Pan may not be a disney creation, but they certinly managed to get their brand in. Three films, only one of which is animated, and an animated series all by Disney. Its not as if anyone in that target age group reads anyway, not when they have the Idiot Box to entertain them.
|
goldenpi
|
Date: December 29, 2003 @ 2:01 PM
Oh, I recently saw a pantomime of Peter Pan. Or rather I attended one anyway, I didn't watch much of it. Family trip. I do remember at the end through, Hook gave a long and emotional speech about the hospital and donations were collected. Compare that with disney, who act like they own the whole thing and dont publicly recognise anyone else except with a line of small print in the credits (at least, I assume they have that).
|
RocketGib
|
Date: December 29, 2003 @ 2:29 PM
It makes you wonder whether or not Disney even owns Mickey Mouse?!
|
Accipiter777
|
Date: December 29, 2003 @ 9:05 PM
As I said b4, "I wonder, some poor SOB is starving somewhere thinkin to himself, "What if i had kept the idea for Mickey Mouse quiet...."."
|
Remye
|
Date: December 30, 2003 @ 8:50 AM
Disney did rip off Mickey.. it WAS Oswald the Rabbit.. they changed his ears and his name and bam! you've got a mouse. I honestly believe the rumour that the mouse was concieved on an acid trip.. whether it's true or not.. it's interesting.
Disney (as a corporation)is just holdin up the deal they made with the devil, but think about it. Most of the "great minds" and "great ideas" of the 20th have been not original thoughts, but stolen ideas (Billy Gate$, Al Snore, and a host of others). Point is, this is nothing new. I just wish (hope) this makes the movie industry look at the way they procure stuff. Eddie Murphy got a lawsuit too, but it didn't do any good.
rant rant rant
happy new year everybody!!
ttmmm
|
iH8RIAA
|
Date: December 30, 2003 @ 11:56 PM
If i remember from my report on DISNEY, he created oswald. HIS idea was ripped off because someone got the copyrights, and he figured this out when he was going for a 2nd season contract with universal that he was expected to take a paycut and that he didnt own the rights to the old rabbit. Mickey was imagined up after he quit his job. (he was still in the poor house. man, this seems almost like a cycle. Disney goes up, gets exploited and in the poor house until he finally gets his own deal, then when the company creator dies, the entire company becomes the stealer.) isnt that interesting?
|
Cygnusia
|
Date: December 31, 2003 @ 10:37 AM
Hmmm...
Remember, Finding Nemo isn't a Disney film. It's a PIXAR film. Even though Disney slaps its name on it, it's not really their baby. I also find it difficult to swallow that Pixar would steal anything. Watching the behind the scenes stuff for the movie, this was being worked on for a few years (before 2002.) Last I heard... clownfish, surgeonfish and cleaner shrimp were public domain... 
|
boycotter
|
Date: January 1, 2004 @ 10:48 PM
crawdd I loved Kimba  was one of my favorite shows when I was a kid  I had a friend whose name was Kim and I called her Kimba  thanks for that site I miss that show.
|
LeoEtoile
|
Date: January 4, 2004 @ 6:30 PM
Disney did in fact steal Kimba The White Lion to create the lying king. And there is also a bit with Atlantis/Nadia. Now I hate disney I wouldn't for a second doubt that they wouldn't steal this and not give any credit. This is so like disney greddy SOB.
|
LeoEtoile
|
Date: January 4, 2004 @ 6:36 PM
hey boycotter Kimba rules  crawdd posted a friend of mins website. Kimba is my favorite anime. Everysingle disney animation is based on a book or somthing else some you can tell and others it is like ???. But read the books its worth it. The Peter Pan new movie is excellent it portays the real story... unlike the disney crap.
|
You must be logged in to post replies to news articles.
Log in or register with the form at the top of the page.
|
|