this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2023
190 points (95.2% liked)

Technology

59207 readers
3599 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] krayj@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If the only things the movie and Dan Ackerman's book have in common are the historical facts, then I don't understand how Ackerman's book is being infringed on. Is there more to it than that? I haven't read Ackerman's book and I've not seen the Apple movie. Are there fictional elements or speculations in Ackerman's book that were translated to the Apple movie?

[–] redimk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That may be true, but I think he might have a case...

The lawsuit said that Ackerman sent a pre-publication copy of the book to the Tetris Company earlier that year. He said the company refused to license its intellectual property for projects related to his book, dissuading producers who were interested in adapting it, and sent him a "strongly worded cease and desist letter."

So he made the book, presented it to Tetris, they rejected the idea, threatened him to sue if he did his own thing, rejected other producers, then I guess partnered with Apple and made it as if it was their idea.

Are there fictional elements or speculations in Ackerman's book that were translated to the Apple movie?

I think so, I think it's more a thematic kind of thing, not the history per se. But I haven't watched the movie or read the book, so this is just my point if view from what the article says.

No idea if it works like that or if he would have a case as I'm not a lawyer, or writer, or producer, so take what I said with a pinch of salt.

[–] krayj@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago

IANAL, so I don't know what are the actual legal merits involved in either having a case or not... but if someone came to me about some facts about me that they published, and they wanted me to 'buy the rights' to those historic facts about me, I'd feel totally justified in telling them to piss off. And if I later decided to create any form of written or video story about myself, the peddler who'd come to me earlier would already be on my blacklist of potential partners to work with.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Only the fictional similarities matter, if any.

He has no future rights to be involved in a movie about a major franchise just because he once proposed a movie of same.

So since we know of no fictional similarities as yet, this case remains entirely to be made in court.