Disney Can’t Sink ‘Pirates of the Caribbean’ Suit Over Jack Sparrow Character – The Hollywood Reporter

Disney’s latest attempt to sink a lawsuit over Pirates of the Caribbean The concession was revoked by a federal judge in California.

Lifting A. Lee Alfred II and Ezequiel Martinez Jr. In November 2017, Disney sued over the franchise. The duo claim that their script defied the tops of pirates by making Davy Jones be funny instead of scary and plundered their work to create Jack Sparrow after their producer Disney sent him in.

Disney appears to have defeated the lawsuit in May 2019 when Consuelo B. Marshall granted her motion to separate to find similar elements between the 2000 specifications and the 2003 film. Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl It was a largely unprotectable general hack fare – but in July 2020, the order was revived by the Ninth US Court of Appeals, which found “the script similar enough to the film to survive a motion to dismiss.”

The appellate court found it too early to definitively define similar items as unprotectable and that additional evidence and expert testimony would help. The opinion states, “This may be particularly useful in this circumstance, where the works in question are approximately twenty years old and the blockbuster film is Pirates of the Caribbean The film franchise itself may have shaped what are now considered the tropes of pirate movies.”

Alfred and Martinez filed an amended complaint, and now Marshall has rejected Disney’s proposal for an expedited judgment due to conflicting expert testimony.

While Disney has argued that the book’s expert is not familiar with the type of pirate and the legal analysis used to assess the high similarity, Marshall notes that “these arguments go to the weight of the plaintiffs’ expert report, and the court cannot weigh the evidence in the summary judgment.”

“The plaintiffs expert is of the opinion that the parties’ actions are substantially similar and have original elements in common, while the respondent’s expert is of the view that the parties’ actions are not substantially the same and that the common elements in the parties’ actions are common to the piracy type in general,” Marshall writes in the order included below. “The parties’ expert opinions therefore create a real issue of the material facts in dispute as to whether the acts are substantially the same.”

Leave a Comment