Identical, plagiarism, is a decision only a judge can make. At least if restitution is desired. If he wants money, if he wants an injunction (like declaring he gets a cut of existing and ongoing...
Identical, plagiarism, is a decision only a judge can make. At least if restitution is desired. If he wants money, if he wants an injunction (like declaring he gets a cut of existing and ongoing revenues, if he wants a court order requiring his name be added to the credits, etc...), judge. Which means lawyer, which means a whole case.
He's trying to do it on the cheap. At first glance this seems like something the WGA might be involved in, but apparently it's not something covered in the basic agreement (the contract that outlines the Guild's responsibilities and reach). He wants the Guild to step in, or at least Social Media to bring the shame, to avoid going through court.
So that could mean he doesn't understand the need to turn to court, or he doesn't believe he has a case, or he's unwilling/unable to pursue it legally.
All I know is plagiarism is a serious charge to level against a writer. It's like walking up to someone and declaring they're a Nazi. It's serious. If he's just sucking sour grapes over the success of this other film, he's just the latest example (albeit a high profile one) of a writer pissed their idea didn't take off. Happens all the time. Most writers are in love with their own work. It's usually one of the hallmarks of being able to write.
But ideas aren't protected. Some guy who takes in a kid, that's a timeless tale. In any form, however the relationship goes, mentor/student (or whatever terms you want to replace those two with) is an old story at its core. And there's only so many ways for different scenes to highlight the steps and stops along the way in that kind of story.
If he has an actual case of plagiarism, a judge will agree. But, as always, there's no bright line in copyright disputes. It's not like murder or assault, where the line's pretty clear. Did person X shoot person Y; probably have a murder/assault case if they did, and probably don't if they didn't. Further, the government undertakes the expense of pursing it.
If writer X accuses writer Y (or production team Y) of copyright infringement, they either agree and come to a settlement, or they disagree and either retreat to opposite corners or engage the courts. Those are the options. Those are the only options that'll resolve things.
Frankly, I find it pretty shitty to turn to social media and try to flog the mob into backing you. Bandwagoning is one of the very negative outcomes from the invention of social media. It was bad enough when they were just called lynch mobs; now people don't even have to get off the couch to join one. It's screwed up how little investment people have to make enroute to destroying people on a daily basis from behind a screen.
If there's a case, put it to a judge and let's find out. Otherwise, he should man up and move on.
Thanks for doing the legwork. I saw this article on Reddit earlier from where it (now not-so-)mysteriously disappeared and wanted to see some insight into these claims. Much appreciated.
Thanks for doing the legwork. I saw this article on Reddit earlier from where it (now not-so-)mysteriously disappeared and wanted to see some insight into these claims.
This was blowing up over social media yesterday. If you read Stephenson's actual script it's not similar at all to Holdovers. The broad stroke would be someone is left with a kid that he has to...
This was blowing up over social media yesterday. If you read Stephenson's actual script it's not similar at all to Holdovers. The broad stroke would be someone is left with a kid that he has to look after. Whatever lawyer told Stephenson had a case was obviously lying to him. Art is made in the specifics not vaguely similar ideas.
It's not uncommon for these Oscar contenders to get accused of plagiarism. Usually it's not from successful screenwriters like Stephenson, but it's still not uncommon. I remember The Shape of Water getting hit with a barrage of plagiarism accusations one of which came out the day before the ceremony (just like it happened here).
The idea that Alexander Payne would feel the need to plagiarize someone is laughable, he doesn't have a writing credit on Holdovers but still. This will absolutely get laughed out of Court. And I find the trades reporting on this to be doing a disgraceful job by pumping it up saying there was "incredible proof" despite the actual screenplay proving otherwise.
I'm not familiar enough with screenplays to say how bad this looks, though I did take a look at the documented evidence provided in the article. Does anyone with more knowledge have any insight on...
I'm not familiar enough with screenplays to say how bad this looks, though I did take a look at the documented evidence provided in the article.
Does anyone with more knowledge have any insight on this?
Is this "brazen" plagiarism as claimed? Or is this story just timeless enough that it could have been written a dozen times?
The thing that strikes me as suspicious is that I can't really think of any other movies or books with a terribly similar setup, and an Internet search didn't turn anything up either. Closest I can really think of is Goodwill Hunting, and that's not very similar at all. Green book maybe? Two dissimilar people becoming friends? Another suspicious aspect is the plot structure and story beats almost lining up, though I know many films share similar structure and tropes.
Identical, plagiarism, is a decision only a judge can make. At least if restitution is desired. If he wants money, if he wants an injunction (like declaring he gets a cut of existing and ongoing revenues, if he wants a court order requiring his name be added to the credits, etc...), judge. Which means lawyer, which means a whole case.
He's trying to do it on the cheap. At first glance this seems like something the WGA might be involved in, but apparently it's not something covered in the basic agreement (the contract that outlines the Guild's responsibilities and reach). He wants the Guild to step in, or at least Social Media to bring the shame, to avoid going through court.
So that could mean he doesn't understand the need to turn to court, or he doesn't believe he has a case, or he's unwilling/unable to pursue it legally.
All I know is plagiarism is a serious charge to level against a writer. It's like walking up to someone and declaring they're a Nazi. It's serious. If he's just sucking sour grapes over the success of this other film, he's just the latest example (albeit a high profile one) of a writer pissed their idea didn't take off. Happens all the time. Most writers are in love with their own work. It's usually one of the hallmarks of being able to write.
But ideas aren't protected. Some guy who takes in a kid, that's a timeless tale. In any form, however the relationship goes, mentor/student (or whatever terms you want to replace those two with) is an old story at its core. And there's only so many ways for different scenes to highlight the steps and stops along the way in that kind of story.
If he has an actual case of plagiarism, a judge will agree. But, as always, there's no bright line in copyright disputes. It's not like murder or assault, where the line's pretty clear. Did person X shoot person Y; probably have a murder/assault case if they did, and probably don't if they didn't. Further, the government undertakes the expense of pursing it.
If writer X accuses writer Y (or production team Y) of copyright infringement, they either agree and come to a settlement, or they disagree and either retreat to opposite corners or engage the courts. Those are the options. Those are the only options that'll resolve things.
Frankly, I find it pretty shitty to turn to social media and try to flog the mob into backing you. Bandwagoning is one of the very negative outcomes from the invention of social media. It was bad enough when they were just called lynch mobs; now people don't even have to get off the couch to join one. It's screwed up how little investment people have to make enroute to destroying people on a daily basis from behind a screen.
If there's a case, put it to a judge and let's find out. Otherwise, he should man up and move on.
Thanks for doing the legwork. I saw this article on Reddit earlier from where it (now not-so-)mysteriously disappeared and wanted to see some insight into these claims.
Much appreciated.
This was blowing up over social media yesterday. If you read Stephenson's actual script it's not similar at all to Holdovers. The broad stroke would be someone is left with a kid that he has to look after. Whatever lawyer told Stephenson had a case was obviously lying to him. Art is made in the specifics not vaguely similar ideas.
It's not uncommon for these Oscar contenders to get accused of plagiarism. Usually it's not from successful screenwriters like Stephenson, but it's still not uncommon. I remember The Shape of Water getting hit with a barrage of plagiarism accusations one of which came out the day before the ceremony (just like it happened here).
The idea that Alexander Payne would feel the need to plagiarize someone is laughable, he doesn't have a writing credit on Holdovers but still. This will absolutely get laughed out of Court. And I find the trades reporting on this to be doing a disgraceful job by pumping it up saying there was "incredible proof" despite the actual screenplay proving otherwise.
I'm not familiar enough with screenplays to say how bad this looks, though I did take a look at the documented evidence provided in the article.
Does anyone with more knowledge have any insight on this?
Is this "brazen" plagiarism as claimed? Or is this story just timeless enough that it could have been written a dozen times?
The thing that strikes me as suspicious is that I can't really think of any other movies or books with a terribly similar setup, and an Internet search didn't turn anything up either. Closest I can really think of is Goodwill Hunting, and that's not very similar at all. Green book maybe? Two dissimilar people becoming friends? Another suspicious aspect is the plot structure and story beats almost lining up, though I know many films share similar structure and tropes.
Payne was largely inspired by a French film titled Merlusse as well as The Last Detail.