I don't think this case holds water unless God wishes to sue both for using the crown fish / anemone symbiosis arguement. I agree that the guy's book should not be pulled though.


BTW Lions King is a direct rip off of Hamlet. It's public domian so I do not think it can be called stealing.

"Finding Nemo"
http://www.sadderday.com/images/nemo.jpg

The plagiarism charges against The Lion King have to do with an old Japanese cartoon called "Kimba the White Lion."

Why wouldn't Disney rip this guy off of his idea? They've never done an original cartoon feature, most are ripped off public domain stories that they then bastardize. Hans Christian Anderson is probably hunting Walt down in the afterlife for a little payback as Iwrite this.

The only thing they did wrong this time was to steal from somebody who was actually still alive.

I think it's important to distinguish Disney from Pixar here.

Oh no.. somebody let the anime fans loose. :(

It seems like someone owns Disney stock. ;)


Based on the article the differences are so coincidental and minor even if they were inspired by the story it is no more than painting a starry sky because you saw Van Gogh's painting. Inspiration is different than plagarism.

And if the bookstore is refusing to carry his book because of Nemo than his issue is with the bookstore.

Sounds wfer thin to me...

I didn't hear the cases against Toy Story and Monsters, Inc., but A Bug's Life is a remake of Seven Samurai. I don't think anybody is going to sue over that, since so many Kurosawa films have been remade in other genres, such as The Magnificent Seven, A Fistfull of Dollars, even Battle Beyond The Stars, among many others.

I also didn't hear much about The Lion King, but I can say that their Atlantis movie is incredibly derivative of an anime called Nadja: Secret of Blue Water, where they stole design elements, plot elements, and actual shots.

Of course, Disney may have bought the rights to Nadja so they could do a remake of it without any legal problem.

Hey this is kind of off topic but does anyone know if there is an Incredibles or Cars refrence in Finding Nemo?

AND if anyone is interested some Incredible Clips:

http://www.pixar.com/theater/trailer...les/clip1.html
http://www.pixar.com/theater/trailer...les/clip2.html
http://www.pixar.com/theater/trailer...les/clip3.html

http://www.pathea.com/pixar/2000/inc.../images/20.jpg http://www.pathea.com/pixar/2000/inc.../images/26.jpg http://www.pathea.com/pixar/2000/inc.../images/23.jpg

Thanks for the pic.

There are references to the Invincibles in Nemo. The kid in the dentist chair has an Incredibles comic book. Also, I believe there is a car from Cars and the pizza truck from Toy Story.

What no one has mentioned and I do find surprising is that Pierrot Le Poisson Clown appears to be a childrens book with illustrations that are computer rendered, thus making the finding nemo connection more evident.

But I tend to take Pixar's side on this. Plagarism suits come up all the time and they're usually gold diggers or idiots who shopped their material without representation (which you should NEVER do)

Its funny to see all the Disney bashing when they have nothing to do with any creativity decisions at Pixar. Pixar does whatever it wants to do and Disney just distributes the movie.
This is so lame, a guy can sue because a movie studio uses a creature found in nature that he happened to use. And (gasp) it is set under water. People are so sue happy.

But the book wasn't published until November 2002! Pixar had been working on Nemo for years by then. Heck, the trailer was already out on the Monsters Inc. DVD.

This guy's trying to build a case on supposedly copyrighting a clownfish character back in 1995. The fact that, seven years later, he self-published a book featuring a computer-rendered version of that character looks to me like he's the one doing the plagiarizing. Not Pixar.

He should just surrender to Disney. It's in his blood.

Apparently...
 

None of you Disney/Pixar fans have any sense of morality and none of you get the point.

The rip-off is self-evident from the facts produced so far. It is clear some unscrupulous Pixar employee turned down the Frenchman's idea back in 1995 and then appropriated it for himself. This being, Pixar will have to pay and pay big.

What's more, this is going to be tried in a French court with the whole world watching. Just what the French have been waiting for in their ongoing war against US cultural imperialism and unfair trade practices in the field of film distribution.

Re: Apparently...
 

I do hope you're joking cuz that's one of the most absurd generalizations ever.

Re: Apparently...
 

:lol: I'll ignore the personal attack and get to your other arguments.It is?It is? Even if you take the guy's story at face value, nowhere does he state that he met with a Pixar employee.Based on what? Certainly not on the evidence presented in this thread. Do you have other evidence that hasn't been shared yet?Yeah, right. "The trial of the century."Your bias is showing. Cultural imperialism? Ha! I've been to France. They aren't forced to see American films, wear American clothes, or eat at McDonalds. They CHOOSE to. If the French stop giving money to American companies, the companies will leave. Simple as that.

Furthermore...
 

I'm sure you will have noticed that none of the big US conglomerate-owned entertainment "news" shows have featured this item.

"Inside Edition", "Entertainment Tonight", etc. were all exclusively preoccupied with Britney Spears' latest sluttish behavior. CNN posted the item on their site on December 31, 2003 (when everyone was busy doing something else) and have since deleted any mention of it.

National orange-alert security measures for the forthcoming war with France?
:johnwoo:

Re: Furthermore...
 

That's because it's pretty much a non-story. If this guy comes up with more conclusive evidence, it would get get more press.Are you for real?

Recent examples of US cine-plagiarism...
 

... include the important out-of-court settlement Spielberg and al. had to pay for ripping off a Sunday-school teacher for her original story of "E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial" and the Japanese sci-fi flick George Lukas had to buy outright, take off the market and destroy because it contained the characters of Pincess Leia and Darth Vader he had "accidentally" ripped off.

Re: Recent examples of US cine-plagiarism...
 

Links?

And of course, even if these stories are 100% true they have no bearing on the Nemo case.

Re: Re: Recent examples of US cine-plagiarism...
 

Nothing has any bearing on anything. The universe is comprised of absolutely independent atoms who have never met socially.

Re: Re: Re: Recent examples of US cine-plagiarism...
 

Dude, you're not making any sense. Yesterday you were normal but today, you're like, the Chinese guy from the Karate Kid. What's with you today?