Twentieth Century Fox said on Monday it will seek an injunction to block release of the Warner Bros movie "Watchmen" after a Los Angeles court ruled a copyright lawsuit against Warner can go forward.
The movie about raffish, flawed superheroes -- which has already been shot -- is slated for release on March 6, said Warner Bros spokesman Scott Roe.
The highly anticipated film, with a budget believed to be about $120 million, is based on a 1980s DC Comics graphic novel written by Alan Moore and illustrated by Dave Gibbons.
In his decision released last week, Judge Gary Feess of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California wrote that Fox could hold some of the rights to the material, even if it did not hold all rights.
Fox argues it acquired motion picture rights to the "Watchmen" graphic novel in the last 1980s, and that even though it relinquished certain rights to the material in 1991 it held onto the right to distribute the first movie.
"We will be asking the court to enforce Fox's copyright interests in "The Watchmen" and enjoin the release of the Warner Brothers film and any related 'Watchmen' media that violate our copyright interests in that property," said Fox spokesman Gregg Brilliant.
"The Watchmen" is directed by Zack Snyder, who made the 2007 hit movie "300." The film is based on edgy material and takes an unorthodox approach to the superhero movie by focusing on flawed antiheroes.
Scott Rowe, a spokesman for Warner Bros, said the ruling only means that the case will go forward.
"The judge did not opine at all on the merits, other than to conclude that Fox satisfied the pending requirements," Rowe said. "We respectfully disagree with Fox's position and do not believe they have any rights in and to this project."
Feess' ruling was issued on Wednesday, in response to Warner Bros' request to have the case dismissed. Warner Bros made the request after Fox sought an injunction against release of "Watchmen."
Fox filed its lawsuit against Warner Bros in February. Fox's accusations against its rival studio included copyright infringement, interference with contract and breach of contract.
DC Comics, the company behind the "Watchmen" graphic novel, is a subsidiary of Warner Bros, which is owned by Time Warner Inc. Fox is owned by News Corp
Source
----------------> FUCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKK!!!
Post a comment »
-
-
posted by
Harley_Quinn, 3 months ago
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
crazymerrick, 3 months ago
I don't think this will deter the release of the movie, I don't even think this'll slow down finishing work in time for March 2009. Bet you a buck Fox and Warner will end up settling this out of court.
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
spitsmaster, 3 months ago
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
crazymerrick, 3 months ago
Oh hell yes it's on, Mr. Kismet.
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
spitsmaster, 3 months ago
Wanna raise the stakes, Ms. Kismet? ;)
lol!
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
crazymerrick, 3 months ago
Sure. I let the gentleman call the shots while I swoon over his manliness. Like it so far?
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
spitsmaster, 3 months ago
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
spitsmaster, 3 months ago
^^how about this, you, me and a bottle of wine... each.
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
acer3ya1, 3 months ago
^ as if spits... dun nga sa isa hindi ka nagpakita e :P
5 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
crazymerrick, 3 months ago
^^Lol humabol pa talaga. One bottle's enough for me. But you, Mr Kismet, probably require more to attain drunkenness and confused agape, yes?
0 pats
0 pokes
-
-
posted by
darthjesus, 3 months ago
@manong ace - sa west coast ba? hihihih
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
acer3ya1, 3 months ago
^tama ka dyan darthie!!
btw, bakit -87 na ako?? syet.
7 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
darthjesus, 3 months ago
^ ayan o may pats ka na manong. lol
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
spitsmaster, 3 months ago
^^loko! hahahaha! alam ko naman tayo, pahard to get effect. nyahahahahaha!
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
spitsmaster, 3 months ago
CM: Yes. No. Maybe. Maybe not... So it that a yes? :P
@Darthie: :P
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
crazymerrick, 3 months ago
^Yes. No. Maybe. Maybe not. Confusion works both ways, you see.
Also, does the lady from the west coast know hifi's been up like your teenage brother's dong?
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
spitsmaster, 3 months ago
^Hmmm... haven't thought about that. So that's a Yes? LOL!
Yup. She know hifi is up. She just couldn't go online at work like me. And I don't have a brother so that might be my dong your talkin about. :P
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
crazymerrick, 3 months ago
^If your mind is stuck at teen age then that was absolutely your dong I'm talking about. And WTF are you doing sitting pretty while she isn't pushed enough to log on to the forum, huh? GET BACK TO WORK! ON HER!
Again, confusion.
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
spitsmaster, 3 months ago
^Whew! Good thing my mind is still stuck at childhood. I think HIFI is block or she has problems log in. But I know she logs on multiply. Sadly, I can't get on multiply here, but I working on it. Not her.
Can I work on you then? :P
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
crazymerrick, 3 months ago
^You two-timing pri- wait, you can't multiply too? BOO! Go back to the mountains or something.
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
spitsmaster, 3 months ago
^so you mean you can't multiply too? Wanna go back to the mountains with me then? :P
0 pats
0 pokes
-
-
posted by
crazymerrick, 3 months ago
^Oh, I can. But I know a few Neanderthals who should opt out of civilization with you. They take anything. Name it - male, female, she-male, she-beast. Want their numbers?
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
spitsmaster, 3 months ago
^damn it. well I'm in works to getting it fixed. hopefully next week i can log in. so, you can keep that number. someone else might want it.
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
abomination, 3 months ago
basta talaga pagdating sa rights in distribution.. aabot sa korte ang labanan
pero sa huli't-huli
PERA..MONEY..DATUNG..KWARTA.. lang din ang habol nila
IT"S ALL ABOUT THE DAMN FREAKIN' MONEY!
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
acer3ya1, 3 months ago
spits is going no where as usual... :P
1 pat
0 pokes
-
posted by
spitsmaster, 2 months ago
0 pats
0 pokes
-
posted by
crazymerrick, 2 months ago
I go for Warner all the way.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/30/movies/30watc.html
'In a summary of its position in Friday’s report, Warner said Fox “sat silently” as one of the producers of “Watchmen,” Lawrence Gordon, took the project “to studio after studio with Fox’s express knowledge.”'
I mean, the press releases for Watchmen have been around for quite some time, and if Fox was really interested to hold on to their rights over the material, why just run after them now that we are only a few months away from a release date and $100 million has already been spent? Anybody get the key terms here, Fox SAT SILENTLY?
*goosfraba*
0 pats
0 pokes
You need to login to post a comment.
