Hmmm... interesting article from Variety here.  I'm wondering why it took the lawsuit this long to be filed, given when Django hit the theaters? And  - if valid - it's a shame if they only registered it WGA, vs. Library of Congress.

For more reading, there's also the Gravity lawsuit (now dropped) as well.  *Sigh.*  

Everyone, always LOC your scripts!  Though you still have to give them exposure.  Otherwise, they'll just collect dust in a drawer...

http://variety.com/2015/film/news/quentin-tarantino-sued-infringement-django-unchained-1201669974/

http://variety.com/2015/biz/news/gravity-lawsuit-warner-bros-tess-gerritsen-1201530746/

Ooh, come on Janet, imo it doesn't matter if you LOC it either. If your idea is gold then someone can change it and slap their name on the title page. There's even people out there so bold that they'll give it a straight up lift, only changing character names (if that).

From my research, there seems to be no real deterrent to this other than establishing a group of talented writers into a circle of trust. And even if you're lucky enough to get a settlement by a plagiarist who's developed your work, your career is questionable at best after you're slut shamed in court. I guess snitches get stitches in Hollywood too lol.

If the similarities were that, er, similar they'd have filed three years ago.

I'm all for underdog stories but sometimes there's just nothing more than co-incidence and wishful thinking on these things. One of their claims if that their character was Jackson Freeman and that sounds a bit similar to Django Freeman... loads of slaves adopted Freeman for obvious reasons...

I'd be very interested to see their script and read it and see how similar it is, but I cant find it online.

Gravity is a little more unusual as she was paid one million dollars but thinks should be paid and extra 50%... possibly so.

As always, make sure you have proof of your copyright but the number of these sort of claims that are substantiated is pretty small... and if you don;t get your script out there then it will never get made

Anthony

Quoted from AnthonyCawood .. and if you don;t get your script out there then it will never get made

That's very true! Like Janet said, you can't do anything with a script in the drawer collecting dust. I'm cynical about this subject, so I'm always cautious of the type of exposure I want a certain script to get. I believe each finished script or work in progress deserves its own game plan.

Tarantino doesn't need to steal anyone else's story.

Fact is, a lot of similar scripts will be written by other people. I bet there are lots of scripts similar to and/or influenced by black slavery in the wild west. I've written one myself. In fact, I've written two. Just not many people have seen the second.

I also don't believe in paying to register a script. Copyright is mine by right as soon as it is written.

He did borrow an awful lot from City On Fire for Reservoir Dogs. And he freely admits to being heavily influenced by many films.

But those are completed films, not scripts. Quite another thing to say a film of his was based on an unknown and unmade script. I doubt he'd bother, or be so daft to do it. But you never know. Watch Reservoir Dogs then City on Fire, The former would certainly be very different without the latter.

Other thing is Django got him best screenplay at the Oscars nearly a year ago. Did these fellas only just notice or have they been very busy for a whole year to only cry foul now?

R

Quoted from oJOHNNYoNUTSo Ooh, come on Janet, imo it doesn't matter if you LOC it either. If your idea is gold then someone can change it and slap their name on the title page. There's even people out there so bold that they'll give it a straight up lift, only changing character names (if that). From my research, there seems to be no real deterrent to this other than establishing a group of talented writers into a circle of trust. And even if you're lucky enough to get a settlement by a plagiarist who's developed your work, your career is questionable at best after you're slut shamed in court. I guess snitches get stitches in Hollywood too lol.

Johnny - you're TOTALLY right... that does happen.  Unfortunately, I suspect, often.  My point along those lines is that LOC copyright is the only protection that - at least theoretically - can let a writer fight for legal damages.  WGA isn't half as helpful, or as long lasting.  Is LOC bulletproof?  Not by a long-shot.  But, to paraphrase lots of comic book movies, it's the best hero we've got...  

Quoted from AnthonyCawood If the similarities were that, er, similar they'd have filed three years ago. I'm all for underdog stories but sometimes there's just nothing more than co-incidence and wishful thinking on these things. One of their claims if that their character was Jackson Freeman and that sounds a bit similar to Django Freeman... loads of slaves adopted Freeman for obvious reasons... I'd be very interested to see their script and read it and see how similar it is, but I cant find it online. Gravity is a little more unusual as she was paid one million dollars but thinks should be paid and extra 50%... possibly so. As always, make sure you have proof of your copyright but the number of these sort of claims that are substantiated is pretty small... and if you don;t get your script out there then it will never get made Anthony

And Anthony - you could well be right on this one.  Without being able to view the scripts side by side, who knows?  I also question why the lawsuit took so long.  Though - maybe they tried other options to resolve first and/or just didn't see the film until now and take note of the similarities?  Or... it *is* just a coincidence.  All possibilities in this case...  

Quoted from DustinBowcot Tarantino doesn't need to steal anyone else's story.

I watch his movies, but come on, the guy has stolen so much. Yeah sure you can pass it off as homage, but let's be real here, if anyone here does the same, they'd be crucified.

I never understood why he used the titles Django and Inglourious Basterds, when they were already the titles of movies he was inspired by. Why just not make up a different name and avoid the obvious criticism.

But I would like to believe the similarities in these suites are coincidence. I doubt he went out of his way to steal.

Tarantino is a cinephile, he watches voracioulsy in numerous genres and in particular B movies from US, Europe and Asia.

He openly admits that these films, which he loves, inspire his writing and his movies. He re-uses titles as a homage to the film makers and the films he likes and will go as far as giving roles to actors he likes in his films (Franco Nero, Sonny Chiba, Pam Grier etc). I genuinely think he see's this as a compliment to the films he likes, and therefore doesn't accept the comparative criticsms, he's the one highlighting them.

But he does take the themes and tropes from the films he likes, mashes them up in his mad brain and creates new and original work with dialogue to die for.

I don't think he's ripped off plots, or dialogue or sequences from anything specifically... which is what you'd have to have done for a claim of copyright infringement to be sustained.

The only potential exception to the above is Reservoir Dogs, as it's plot is very similar to City on Fire... but hey Tarantino was young and a fan of 80s HK cinema So was i at the time, I didn't get off my arse and create a homage popular the world over, more's the pity.

But in this particular case, it's not someone accusing him of borrowing from an existing property, it's an accusation of pilfering from someone's unknown and unmade script.

Sorry but I don't buy it, it just doesn't match Tarantino's normal 'homage' style.

I should add...

I reserve the right to be proved horribly wrong and for you all to, quite rightly, take the p*ss out of me mercilessly

I doubt QT ripped these guys off, but it's all grey area isn't it? My best guess on why this took so long is the plaintiffs couldn't settle out of court with their claim. If QT did steal it, then we probably would've never even heard about it.

Or - QT did steal it (or rather, having read the other script, the studio "suggested" certain things to him, which he ran with and gave his usual spin). The original guys tried their best to settle out of court, failed, and finally decided to tackle King Kong/QT with a lawsuit.

Or - they're cherry picking a few similarities that are merely coincidental and a case of parallel creative evolution.

No way to really know, short of having the scripts available to compare side by side.

I don't believe there's too many assholes out there that are looking to screw over someone's hard work. But I don't put it past them either. That said, there's always gonna be similarities between different authors. Can't dispute that.

Screenwriting is unique because what's written isn't final, even after Fade Out. Sometimes if you got something special - you gotta treat it like it is. The author should be accountable for their own chain of custody, just because it's copyright doesn't mean it should be unnecessarily flaunted.

Quoted from oJOHNNYoNUTSo Screenwriting is unique because what's written isn't final, even after Fade Out. Sometimes if you got something special - you gotta treat it like it is. The author should be accountable for their own chain of custody, just because it's copyright doesn't mean it should be unnecessarily flaunted.

I totally agree.  IMHO:LOC Copyright (even for shorts - which can be filed as a compilation) is necessary.  

And chain of custody is important, too.  For instance, I have my shorts available for download on my website - but the features?  You gotta ASK ME DIRECTLY for those.  That's not the sort of thing I want floating out in the ether willy-nilly. And that's the balance between marketing and safety I personally  feel most comfortable taking.

Re: similarities.  Honestly?  I've already had three cases (two features, one short) that - after I wrote them - I had a writing friend or two point out that they'd already seen something similar.  So... there is such a thing as parallel evolution.  And a general idea is 100% different than the final execution.  But it's when someone actually *lifts* characters, beats, etc from a script, things do get truly evil.

You know Phil had a few cases where college kids (different instances) actually took his short scripts and PUT THEIR NAMES ON THEM?  They were LOCed works, and he contacted both the website and their school and had it crushed.  But really.  Some people do such things.

I imagine QT would never out and out say "hey, lemme re-write this other guy's script."  But I do find it possible that a studio might lift certain ideas and suggest to QT that he "should do something like X,Y,Z."  I'm not saying that necessarily happened in this case. But - it could have.  Depends. :/