Julie Taymor sues SPIDER-MAN producers- Page 2

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/9/11 at 10:32am

best12bars, correct me if I'm wrong, but don't screenwriters sell their scripts to the movie studios and/or producers? In theater a writer owns their work and it cannot be used or changed without their permission.

This is the gray area I'm talking about (above).

If it's an original story/script, I would say the playwright is the "owner" of the work and permission from the author would need to be granted. In this case, Julie was adapting the Spider-Man legend and characters, and even if her plot may be somewhat original, this is definitely an adaptation of previously created (and copyrighted and trademarked) work.

It's a "work for hire" in other words. Not a wholly original work that she owns herself.

Updated On: 11/9/11 at 10:32 AM

[theatreguy]

Posted: 11/9/11 at 10:44am

Well, let's just say I think you're wrong. Luckily for those involved though, there are actual legal experts who can resolve this for them.

Also, I just saw the statement from the producers. They don't say anything about using her copyrighted material, but they do claim that she has in fact been paid:

Spider-Man lead producers Michael Cohl and Jeremiah J. Harris issued a statement Nov. 8, which reads, "Since Ms. Taymor’s departure in March, we have repeatedly tried to resolve these issues. The production has indeed compensated Ms. Taymor for her contribution as a co-book writer. Fortunately the court system will provide, once and for all, an opportunity to resolve this dispute. We look forward to a resolution in which everyone is properly compensated for their contribution to Spider-Man Turn Off The Dark."

https://www.playbill.com/news/article/156368-Julie-Taymor-Files-Lawsuit-Against-Spider-Man-Producers-Issue-Statement
Updated On: 11/9/11 at 10:44 AM

Posted: 11/9/11 at 10:44am

And this discussion perfectly illustrates why she's taking this to court.

[sundayclothes2]

Posted: 11/9/11 at 11:57am

I spent the greater part of the morning pouring over all 40 pages of the lawsuit.

Tamyor was NOT contracted as "work-for-hire." The only work for hire work she did was the creation of Miss Arrow/Arachne for Marvel. She had two contracts: One for a treatment in 2004, and then a long-form authors agreement.
Typically a book writer does not own the book and the production can make changes. However, Ms. Taymor had it her and Glen Berger's contract that she was the only person that could make changes to the book or could communicate changes to the producers. Between December 2010 - February 2011, Glen Berger went behind her back and with the producers devised a list of changes to the book. Technically, they are not allowed to make any changes to her book without her permission nor are the producers and Mr. Berger are not allowed to talk about changing the book without Julie present. For them to be legally in the clear, they would had have to thrown out her book completely and started from scratch. They couldn't even use her storyline since that would be infringing upon her 2004 copyrighted treatment.

Her best case is that they are still advertising the show with her name (the poster outside the theater, the website) and she is not receiving any royalties. Additionally, dialogue she wrote has been printed verbatim in merchandise such as souvenir programs for which she receives no royalties. The only royalties the producers have paid her is for November 2010-March 2011....she has not been paid any royalties for her work since she was let go. This would be fine if a) they were not using any of work or b) they were not still advertising the show on her name

She has a pretty strong case. Especially since she isn't just going after them for wrongful termination, she has some real substantial claims.
Updated On: 11/9/11 at 11:57 AM

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 11/9/11 at 12:22pm

"Injuctive Relief means she wants them to stop using the script that she authored (even if that script is only fragments of her authorship). An injunction, which she is seeking, is a legal tool that requires a party to either do something or refrain from doing something. There is no monetary award from the court in this type of action. She wants them to stop using her script. There's no show without the script. Therefore she wants to shut them down. In theory, her seeking injuctive relief can be a method to force a monetary settlement, but they would have to be confidant that the Court would grant the relief without a doubt."

I know what injunctive relief is, but appreciate the clarification nevertheless, Fosse76. My bolded section of your post is exactly my point. It was the action that Larson's dramaturg, Lynn Thomson took under similar circumstances in a lawsuit over her contributions to Rent. Thomson settled out of court, but she had far less proof of her contributions, whereas in the case of Spider-Man, Taymor's are well-documented and unquestionable. My point being, the true purpose of her seeking injunctive relief is not to shut the show down, but to get her money. Yes, it's a big gun to pull, but in her case, not much of a risk.

[Taryn]

Posted: 11/9/11 at 1:22pm

The section of the lawsuit stipulating the injunction specifically says no use of her material WITHOUT monetary compensation. She doesn't want to shut the show down. She wants them to be forced to be in the position of paying her the money owed her by continuing to use her material.