Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

'Nemo' Plagiarized?

Community
Search
Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

'Nemo' Plagiarized?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-30-03, 09:28 AM
  #1  
DRG
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: ND
Posts: 13,421
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
'Nemo' Plagiarized?

From http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...m/film_nemo_dc

French Author Claims 'Finding Nemo' Plagiarism

Hollywood Reporter
Tue Dec 30,12:21 AM ET


By Shiraz Sidhva

PARIS (Hollywood Reporter) - A French children's author has sued Walt Disney Pictures and Pixar Animation Studios, claiming the cartoon fish they catapulted to fame in the worldwide blockbuster "Finding Nemo" was plagiarized from his 1995 creation Pierrot Le Poisson Clown.

AP Photo Photo
AP Photo
Slideshow Slideshow: Movies: 'Finding Nemo'



Pascal Kamina, a copyrights lawyer representing the author, Franck Le Calvez, confirmed in a telephone interview Monday that the case -- claiming damages for breach of copyright and trademark and demanding that they withdraw "Nemo" books and merchandise from French shops -- will come up for hearing in a French court Feb. 17.

Disney denied the claims.

"We consider the case filed in France to be totally without merit because 'Finding Nemo,' which is owned by Pixar and Disney, was independently developed and does not infringe anyone's copyrights or trademarks," according to a statement that Disney released Monday.

Le Calvez, a 33-year-old aquarium buff, said in an interview Monday that he registered Pierrot as a trademark with France's industrial protection and copyrights body in 1995. An aspiring filmmaker, Le Calvez said he then did the rounds of French production companies and animation studios, hoping they would fall for the lovable tropical fish with white stripes and large orange bulging eyes. But he was turned down, and the little fish languished in a folder until 2000, when Le Calvez decided to make Pierrot the hero of an illustrated children's book.

Registering the screenplay with the French Society of Authors in June 2002, Le Calvez paid nearly $71,000 to publish 2,000 copies of the book in November 2002. Illustrated by Robin Delpuech and Thierry Jagodzinski, "Pierrot Le Poisson Clown" was published by France's Editions Flaven Scene, and the entire print run was sold in a month.

Agreeing that the uncanny resemblance between Pierrot and Nemo could be coincidental (clown fish, Amphiprion ocellaris, do look alike in nature), Le Calvez said he realized something was fishy only after French bookstore chain FNAC removed copies of his book from their shelves, claiming that it was too similar to Disney's version.

"What's really upsetting is that quite a few bookstores won't sell my book because they think that I have plagiarized 'Nemo,"' the author said in an interview Monday. "The two fish look very similar, but it doesn't end there."

Like Nemo, Pierrot lives in a pink sea anemone and starts life half-orphaned because one parent was swallowed up by Liona, the scorpion fish. "The beginning of the story is the same, even if the scenarios then become different," Le Calvez said.

Kamina, who admitted that the film was finished by the time Le Calvez's first book came out (a second has been written since), said he is worried that his client's success will be swallowed up by the American fish. He said the "Nemo" idea probably found its way to the United States through one of the French studios that Le Calvez approached in 1995.

"That would be the only explanation," he said. "It's not just the resemblance of the clown fish, smiling with a raised fin. We have also found the same supporting characters in the film -- such as a surgeon fish and cleaner shrimp -- and gentle fish folk who help the little troubled hero. The similarities are sufficiently troubling for us to ask for an explanation from Disney."

The lawyer said his client is still waiting for an answer from Disney and that if they don't hear from the company, Le Calvez will press ahead with his lawsuit in France.

"I want my fish to live," Le Calvez said.

Reuters/Hollywood Reporter
You be the judge:
Pierrot:

Nemo:


I can't vouch for the storyline, but the designs ARE very similar.
Old 12-30-03, 09:33 AM
  #2  
Needs to provide a working email
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Formerly known as Darrin Garrison
Posts: 3,321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Could it be because they are both based on a real fish?
Old 12-30-03, 09:35 AM
  #3  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 71,383
Received 122 Likes on 84 Posts
Bear in mind that Nemo has been around at Pixar for years. He even has a cameo in Monsters Inc..
Old 12-30-03, 09:36 AM
  #4  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 4,661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Oops...
Old 12-30-03, 09:45 AM
  #5  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 4,661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Groucho
Bear in mind that Nemo has been around at Pixar for years. He even has a cameo in Monsters Inc..
Monsters. Inc. is a 2001 film, most likely produced in late 1999 and 2000 but the Nemo reference could've been added at the last minute. This guy had the Pierrot registered as a trademark with France's industrial protection and copyrights body in 1995. It's pretty apparent that Pixar derived some part if not all of their Finding Nemo story from this source. Most importantly, Pierrot trademark has been compromised and I think Franck Le Calvez deserves some sort of renumuration.
Old 12-30-03, 09:50 AM
  #6  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 71,383
Received 122 Likes on 84 Posts
Originally posted by neiname
It's pretty apparent that Pixar derived some part if not all of their Finding Nemo story from this source.
Why? Because both stories have to do with the same kind of fish? Come on! You'd have to prove that Pixar somehow saw this guy's material and decided to plagiarize.
Old 12-30-03, 09:50 AM
  #7  
DRG
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: ND
Posts: 13,421
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
The guy's case probably boils down to whether or not he can make any real connections between the people he shopped this to in 1995 (at which point I doubt Pixar had begun work on Monsters Inc., let alone Nemo) and Disney or Pixar. Either way, this won't affect anyone but France.
Old 12-30-03, 10:03 AM
  #8  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 71,383
Received 122 Likes on 84 Posts
According to this interview, Andrew Stanton first got the idea for Finding Nemo in 1992:

http://www.unreel.co.uk/features/fea...odirectors.cfm

I wanted to do something under water with computer graphics - I got the setting before I got the story, in 1992 while we were still developing Toy Story.
Old 12-30-03, 10:14 AM
  #9  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 23,225
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
This is retarded.. here's a picture of a REAL clownfish:



So I guess people can trademark animals now?
Old 12-30-03, 10:35 AM
  #10  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Groucho
According to this interview, Andrew Stanton first got the idea for Finding Nemo in 1992:

http://www.unreel.co.uk/features/fea...odirectors.cfm
That doesn't mean much, it seems to be from the quick skim-read I did of that article that Stanton only came up with the idea to do something underwater because he though it would show off CG.

You can't base the case on the character since it is a real fish, if the story is as similar as is implied in the story then they have a case. And hopefully they will win it if in fact it is proven to have been stolen.

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't take it from this guy.

Last edited by fnordboy; 12-30-03 at 11:49 AM.
Old 12-30-03, 11:46 AM
  #11  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 23,225
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Read the article.. the ONLY merit this thing has going for it is who he pimped his story to in 1995. He even admits that after the beginning the stories become different.

His book came out in 2000, Nemo had already begun production years ago. Nemo probably start production 1998-1999.

I just don't see this going anywhere..
Old 12-30-03, 11:53 AM
  #12  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: not CT
Posts: 9,617
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
I would actually say that the designs are quite dissimilar once the unalienable source material has been eliminated.
Old 12-30-03, 11:54 AM
  #13  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 4,661
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Groucho
Why? Because both stories have to do with the same kind of fish? Come on! You'd have to prove that Pixar somehow saw this guy's material and decided to plagiarize.
"That would be the only explanation," he said. "It's not just the resemblance of the clown fish, smiling with a raised fin. We have also found the same supporting characters in the film -- such as a surgeon fish and cleaner shrimp -- and gentle fish folk who help the little troubled hero. The similarities are sufficiently troubling for us to ask for an explanation from Disney."
Old 12-30-03, 12:05 PM
  #14  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 71,383
Received 122 Likes on 84 Posts
Any two underwater stories are going to have a lot of minor similarities. For this guy to have a case at all, I think he would need to show that his 1995 treatment featured at least half of the key plot elements of Nemo:

1. One fish searching the ocean for another fish.
2. The “Lucky Fin”
3. Sidekick with short-term memory loss.
4. Vegetarian sharks.
5. Surfer Turtles.
6. Escape from a fish tank.
7. Over-protective father (and the accompanying backstory)
8. Navigation through a school of jellyfish.
Old 12-30-03, 12:30 PM
  #15  
DRG
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: ND
Posts: 13,421
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by PixyJunket

[/B]
RIPOFF!!!!!!!

Old 12-30-03, 01:37 PM
  #16  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 8,085
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Heres a drawing I did in second grade.





Disney is so getting sued.
Old 12-30-03, 03:22 PM
  #17  
DVD Talk God
 
Deftones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Arizona
Posts: 81,033
Received 1,366 Likes on 928 Posts
Nemo was in Monsters Inc? Where?
Old 12-30-03, 03:27 PM
  #18  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,147
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Grrr. I hate Pixar. Not a creative bone in any of the employees.
Old 12-30-03, 03:43 PM
  #19  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Kal-El's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fortress of Solitude
Posts: 7,992
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by Deftones
Nemo was in Monsters Inc? Where?
In either Boo's bedroom or in one of the bedrooms that she and Sully "visit" during the climax. It was a doll/pillow type thing.
Old 12-30-03, 03:44 PM
  #20  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Plano, TX
Posts: 23,225
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by Deftones
Nemo was in Monsters Inc? Where?
Well.. I HAD screencaps I made but they're on my old PC.

One time is when Sully is throwing Randall in the door to the trailer park, you see a Nemo fish on a plaque in the door. The other is when Boo finally gets home and starts picking up all her toys for Sully, one of them is a squeaky Nemo. The first one is hard to spot, the second is easy.
Old 12-30-03, 03:56 PM
  #21  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
~~ PAL ~~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 6,294
Received 194 Likes on 167 Posts
Indeed, this lawsuit will not get anywhere.
Old 12-30-03, 05:08 PM
  #22  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
tanman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Gator Nation
Posts: 9,951
Received 961 Likes on 668 Posts
Based on the story there are way to few similarities. "Friendly folk that help him out" Come on, so this guy owns a patent on sturgeon fish and friendly folk?

Should God sue for originally creating the fish?

If he wants his story to succeed than do it on your own not through generated hype with a frivilous lawsuit.
Old 12-30-03, 07:11 PM
  #23  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 19,684
Received 650 Likes on 450 Posts
Re: 'Nemo' Plagiarized?

What I think is the most telling quote is this:
"What's really upsetting is that quite a few bookstores won't sell my book because they think that I have plagiarized 'Nemo,"' the author said in an interview Monday.
This guy isn't suing because he thinks he got ripped off, he's suing so that he can get his book back on the shelves. It's part pre-emptive strike, part name clearing. If the judge finally rules that there's no connection between the two properties, well that works both ways. It would prove that his work is not a rip-off of Pixar's.
Old 12-30-03, 07:18 PM
  #24  
Cool New Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Silly indeed...

But... people are always claiming that Disney has stolen ideas from elsewhere.

Both Toy Story and Monsters Inc were targets.
Bugs Like is another example.

Lion King is probobly the only one that "might" have been stolen, but thats still arguable.

But in all the other cases, I think its just a case that Disney has alot of money, and corrupt lawyers think that if they can get Disney to settle to prevent bad press, then its easy money.

A different issue is the store that was pulling this guys book. That DOES seem unfair.
Its no different then when Disney forced film festivals to NOT show the movie that Lion King was ripped from.

Give credit where it is do, then move on

Nick
Old 12-30-03, 10:24 PM
  #25  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
caligulathegod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Grove City OH
Posts: 3,854
Received 45 Likes on 26 Posts
Hmm, a Disney movie where the mother was killed? Never seen that in a Disney animated film before.


Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.