LogFAQs > #960008139

streamofthesky posted...

Scarlet beat Disney. And had way less of a case than this. Think she ended up getting $60 million when the movie only made like $400M, and had Shang Chi to prove what happens when you do a theater-only release in the COVID era.

She had a pretty iron-clad case. Her contract said theatre-only. They did a streaming release and refused to renegotiate the contract to ensure she got her fair share from that. They breached the contract, she collected what she was owed. Very straightforward.

Had she not tried to renegotiate to account for how unfeasible a theatre-only release would have been, she might not have a case. It could be argued that there was reason to presume that the original plan of theatre-only wouldn't go ahead, and that her failure to bring that up meant she was okay with whatever that meant for her cut. But she did, and they refused, so I have no sympathy for them.

Nichtcrawler X posted...

Then they should have done so when they first found.

Yeah, if the comic's been around since 2016 and the porn producers haven't tried to protect their trademark, there's a pretty good chance Disney will be able to cite that as them giving up their claim to it and squash the whole thing.

Arcturusisnow posted...

Regardless, it proves Disney isn't as powerful as they make themselves out to be.

I have a sneaking suspicion that Scarlett Johansson can afford considerably better lawyers than a random Japanese porn producer can, or at the very least isn't going to be so afraid of the prospect of having to pay Disney's legal fees if she loses that she'd avoid suing. That's not something a small company is going to be able to absorb easily, so even if they stand a decent chance in court (which, given their failure to object when the comic came out, is a stretch) it's unlikely they'll even try.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.