Call it Nemo or Pierrot ?
By glazou on Saturday 20 December 2003, 16:01 - General - Permalink
In december 1995, the Disney engineer being the key note speaker at the WWW international conference in Boston said "I am proud to be an employee of this company bringing culture to the world". Well, Justice will say if Disney is also bringing unethic culture to the world:
In december 1995, author Franck Le Calvez has protected the scenario of a cartoon. Read well its summary: Pierrot is a young clownfish. Pierrot lost its father, eaten by a big fish. Separated from its mother, it finds her again at the end of the scenario after many adventures.... Franck Le Calvez submitted his story to producers but they refused it. And Nemo comes.... Franck Le Calvez is now suing Disney and the future is in the hands of Justice. But that's really a weird story isn't it?
Source: Le Monde.
Comments
Pixar are responsible for the film - not Disney, as they are purely in the partnership on a branding basis. So he would have a right to complain if he had submitted his idea to Pixar.
Disney could have approached Pixar with the film idea. We'll have to wait for the courts to decide.
It doesn't quite work that way - Pixar has a contract withy Disney for 5 films (I think) to establish the Pixar brand. Disney does not know what the films will be, e.g. the next one is about washed up super heroes.
The whole story is an interesting coincidence, but I think all children's stories borrow bits and pieces from each other.
coincidence? are you nuts?
sounds to me like they changed it just enough where it was a different story
what suprises me is... what took this guy so long to sue?
Andrew Stanton at Pixar came up with the idea for Nemo, so Disney shouldn't be involved with this at all. Stanton's idea came around the same time, around when Toy Story was released, and in any case Le Calvez' story was only pitched to local studios in France. Even had he pitched to Disney's Paris studio, they would have kept it sealed. As for his claims about the book, it was published in 2002. It was only a copywritten story IDEA before that, in no published form. Nemo would have been written, storyboarded, designed, and recorded by then, and already well into animation. It takes longer than a year to animate a feature film. Then you factor in that the movie would have been nearly complete by early 2003, to be ready for release in May 2003, and there's no grounds. This guy just happened to come up with a similar idea & characters around the same time as the writer/director of Nemo.
I found this story also at another site and it says that one clown fish looks much like another. Clownfish look like that. So Pixar and Disney couldn't have stolen the design. It also says, that they both live in an anemone. Well, on the "Exploring the Reef" with Jean-Michel Cousteau, he says Clown fish live in anemones, so Disney and Pixar couldn't have taken that idea either because clown fish DO live in anemones.
Yes, a clownfish is a clownfish. And they all live in anemones. But not all clownfishes lose a parent, are lost in the ocean and try to escape from an aquarium while the other parent crosses the ocean to find the last kid, right? Whoever made the scenario and whatever is the final legal decision here (please re-read my post, I never said Disney is guilty, I said they are sued, period), Disney _is_ the distributor of the film, the owner of the copyright on all toys, books and derivated products. The guy is imho totally right to sue Disney and not Pixar, again whatever are his real rights here.
je trouve les réclamations de Le Calvez tout à fait légitime puisqu'il a écrit cette histoire en 1995. Maintenant savoir qui attaqué n'est pas une question simple entre Pixar et Disney.
En tout cas le fait est qu'il y a une contrefaçon certaine et que Le Calvez mérite d'être soutenu
ALL CLOWN FISH LOOK ALIKE!!!! WHO CARES!!! PEOPLE JUST NEED TO CALM DOWN. IT'S JUST A MOVIE.
Greetings,
Actually, in the past Disney has many times taken ideas and story plots from other places. I guess most of you are familiar with THE LION KING, well, maybe you might also have noticed it's EXTREME similarity with the very popular japanese TV series by Tezuka (1969) KIMBA THE WHITE LION.
Maybe you are also familiar with Disney's ATLANTIS. This one was taken by an other japanese Tv series called NADIA AND THE SECRET OF THE BLUE STONE (Gainax studio). You can actually go and compare frames from both shows and they are the same (story, character design, mecha design...). Of course Gainax had done their show many years earlier to Disney's...
So, why would it not be the same case again? Even if this time it is more Pixar than Disney doing it.
Then again, some might say: "Don't all artists get inspired from each other..."
Y.M
Look the picture at :
frenchycomics.free.fr/act...
;o)
i think its not fair.im a Finding Nemo fan but they shouldn't have said his book was silly
quote:ALL CLOWN FISH LOOK ALIKE!!!! WHO CARES!!! PEOPLE JUST NEED TO CALM DOWN. IT'S JUST A MOVIE.
well thats what people always say.like when my friend said:their have 2 whisker and their have 3.is different.but hwy must they use clown fish?
I think finding Nemo was a good movie. And if the French author is the original writer he should sue Disner/Pixar and make a big deal out of it! Have you seen what people have to go through if they copy anything made in USA (all those copyright/patent laws). Well its time it you get what you give!
Note from Daniel: this comment was posted twice and I removed the first - and incomplete - one.
The case between Disney and the rights to the Pooh stories has gone on for decades. When you are dealing with an American corporate bully you have little chance. I wish Franck Le Calvez the best of luck but when it comes to millions of dollars at stake here its the big boys that win every time. It is after all just a story about a fish but in todays world of stupid Intellectual Property rules its all about power, one day wars will be fought over copyright disputes.
I bet that bastard eisner is responsible for this thievery.
quote:ALL CLOWN FISH LOOK ALIKE!!!! WHO CARES!!! PEOPLE JUST NEED TO CALM DOWN. IT'S JUST A MOVIE.
So it's OK to use whatever you want in a movie or cartoon? Ther won't be much of an existance for the small guys in the entertainment industry if you take this view. Franck Le Calvez's book has been pulled out of French bookshops because they are scared Disney will sue them! So basically, Frank's is not able to make a living of his creation at the moment! Good luck to him - if there is merit in his claims he deserves to be recompensed!
Where can we see the whole PIerrot story? I'd like to compare them...
I would like to know when that rendering (top)was created... I would not be surprised if the image was created after they saw Nemo stuff and decided to use as a way to create the connection between the two... If that assuption is correct, the Pixar should sue those guys...
I would agree, that if these ideas were both being concepted at the same time..this french guy could even be taking pixar for a ride. (like people who sue mcdonalds because their coffee is too hot) Perhaps he read an early plot release and quickly copy righted his "idea". Not that it isn't way more likely to be the other way around -- totally possible. I'd rather vote for the little guy, but who knows. This does appear to be more than a coincidence. That much is obvious.
On a statement at bbcnews.com it says that this author had his books taken off the shelves because the book stores are afraid of cpyright laws or something. Whatever the cause (I personally don't care very much about this) but if this guy sues for anything. Sue the stores that took out his books, they seem to be the ones that started this man to think Disney/Pixtar stole his idea... just my opinion
censored by Daniel (no insults here)
Till Ragnar (eller Grímur) : tyvärr förstår jag vad du skriver... Du är en riktig skam för Island.
RE: "...one clown fish looks much like another. Clownfish look like that."
I real life yes, one clown fish looks like another. However, there are almost limitless possibilities on how the fish is artistically drawn/rendered/animated. The fish in Nemo is nearly identical in artistic style to the cover of "Pierrot".
Of course this only points out to how blatantly the French book was ripped off. Even if the style was significantly different, the real issue is that the stories are nearly identical. Essentially the seem to be the same story with only some minor changes here and there to make them different enough.
Oh, and in regard to "ALL CLOWN FISH LOOK ALIKE!!!! WHO CARES!!! PEOPLE JUST NEED TO CALM DOWN. IT'S JUST A MOVIE"
Imagine if you worked hard writing a book. Spent LOTS of time and energy going from publisher to publisher, and finally, after a long struggle you manage to get your book published. BOOM! The Big Bad Media Giant comes along and puts out movie that is nearly identical to yours. All they did was switch a few characters and details around and crunched it out...selling YOUR hard work and making BIG $$$ of it. I am trying to write a story, it's not easy, and I am sure more seasoned, professional writers will still say it’s not easy. Getting published is not easy either. What is easy is ripping some small time Frenchie, rearrange a few story details and selling it to an American Public that is kept insulated/ignorant from almost all things foreign.
It's not "just a movie". It is an idea that one person worked passionately on. When one person's creation is usurped by large companies with deep pockets (indeed, if they are usurped by anyone) we ought to realize that anyone of us can be that one person.
That is why people ought to care.
Is not the first time... Lion King or Tezuka? www.kimbawlion.com/rant2....
Franck: I do not beleive there is such a copyright law for the small creator. Example I have just come from the High Court in London with costs of £500.000.00 against me and I was stopped from proceeding to trial. My case started five years ago. There seems to be one law for the rich and another for the poor. Strange in my case the animation/TV company had incorporated the same unusual errors which all were ignored by the judge. My project consisted of stories, a video and huge amounts of reasearch and was conceived 1.5 years prior to theirs. Their project is highly successful world-wide.Interestingly in inferance what is the dividing line between similar and a copy? I also had causal contact in the media. Franck it is tough and if I were you find a good doctor because he will be your best friend until the end of the case. From my experience I will advise you on some of the clever tactics the opposition lawyers used, if you would like to contact me.
It is hard to stop!!!
James
For those of you comparing Lion King to anything else, you should keep in mind that it is actually based on Shakespeare's story of Hamlet. So maybe both Simba AND Kimba are examples of plaigarism, albeit copying a work that is 400 years old.
Pierrot is very rotten The History is very different .A clown fish whom he is called Pierrot or Nemo will have a very similar drawing.
A clown fish is a clown fish.
Je n'aime pas Disney, leur méthode de copie est largement éprouvée, principalement la honteuse copie de "The Secret of Blue Water" (Nadia, le secret de l'eau bleue) de Hideaki Anno/Gainax de 1992 qu'ils ont traitreusement appelé "Atlantis".
Sachant que Nadia est déjà inspirée de Laputa.
Les deux pages suivantes doivent aidée à comprendre l'étonnante similitude :
Nadia vs Atlantis : www.thesecretofbluewater.... et en français : www.thesecretofbluewater....
Laputa vs Atlantis : members.aol.com/_ht_a/scj...
Teuka vs Le Roi Lion : www.kimbawlion.com/rant2....
"Le Sunday 21 December 2003 à 22:12, commentaire par Robert :: #
It doesn't quite work that way - Pixar has a contract withy Disney for 5 films (I think) to establish the Pixar brand. Disney does not know what the films will be, e.g. the next one is about washed up super heroes."
Are you people stupid? Of COURSE Disney knows what films Pixar is putting out. They didn't just sign a blind deal for five films. Disney has to approve the films. Otherwise they could make an entire film about a dog taking a huge dump. "Here ya go, Disney! Only one more film to go!" This guy could sue both Pixar, and Disney, and I suggest he does just that. Most likely they will settle out of court for a sum of cash.
This is a close and shut case. On investigating the court-papers, and the jurisprudence, I can say that the original author Franck Le calvez will win. He submitted his works to protect them, in several ways, according to french law. He also submitted an original movie-script, based on his idea.
In doing so, he's right to sue. The question of a lot of people is: why wait so long? It is not a question of waiting, but getting all the evidence out in the open (don't forget on the thousands of items around the world that are brought out with Finding Nemo on it!). To win, you need to have ALL the evidence.
It is also difgficult to sue without knowing how much money Pixar and disney made! Since it is slowly being published on both sites (ie Pixar and Disney) you need to have clarified how much they made!
Also, think of the following. It is so easy to check copyright on figurines or fish (so to speak) by checking the Internet, or simply hire a good trademarking specialist. They would have filtered this, a long time ago!
The last comment just above this one is probably the most reasonable one in this whole thread : even if Disney never "took" his idea/scenario, they should have checked if the idea/scenario was protected or not. Apparently, it was. And a small company like Disney can't say they don't have the money nor the people for such research. So Le Calvez is indeed perfectly right to sue. Copyrights are ***made*** for that.
If they had the same idea 100% independently from his, conciliation/negociation will probably be proposed by the judge. If the idea came independently but if copyright research showing prior art was neglected, that's worse. And if the idea was stolen, that's even worse.
Laws and copyrights are made for everyone. Including Disney. That's all what this thing is about.
I belive this is nonesence... this is only a french guy trying to take money out of the big guys.
Pierrot and Nemo are not identical stories, though they follow a simmilar narrative structure...and if you read the overall story you can say its simmilar to the lion king... simba lost his father, ran away, and then came back after many adventures. its simply a "Cliche" story.
Now, read well, Nemo isnt the one looking for his mother, its his father looking for its son, Nemo is a dissabled child, you can see Pierrot is not.
I dont think the "adventure" the fish of Nemo had is near simmilar to the one of Pierrot.. they are only basing the law suit because of a premise.
So in the end this makes two different stories made out of a cliche premise.... see the premises for 1000 movies and youll end up with 50% of them been simmilar to this one.
Id say the same law suit could be made between the Coca cola and pepsi cola, or mc Donalds and Burger king, or star Treck and Babylon 5.
BTW: if your going to make a children's movie and have to use an underwater environment, wich kind of fish would make the perfect main character?.
Think about it and youll have the same result from Nemo and Pierrotand this brings me to my sister, when she was 8 years old made a story for school and it involved a clown fish, so beeing this the case, she can put a law suit against Pierrot and Nemo for using a Clown Fish in their stories.
Come on people, grow up.
I look at this: (its a quote from another formu):
Heeeey, this is one huge of a point that (forum member) brings to us and we are not even noticing.
Nemo was actually used in Pixar's "Monster INC", and was released way before the Pierrot Book was released, so that means Nemo's Story was Developed and in an actual production by the time they ended Monsters INC... and im not counting the time it takes to make a movie (3-4 Years), and im not counting either the time it takes to make the script, then register that script and characters, that takes half to a year to do, and the overall story must have been given to Disney when they made the deal with them... if not, how come they say Toy Story 2 wasn in the deal?, because they had the other stories stated before hand. Just like The incredibles, and cars.
Also Knowing how Pixar hires its staff from all over the world what are the possibilities of a staff member stated the premise of the movie he is working on to a friend or in a chat room, and then this French Guy makes a book (knowing its easyer and faster to make than a movie) and then waiting to see if he can get rich by an idea it wasnt his thanks to a law suit.?
First : Argggggg, it's Star Trek !
Premièrement : Argggg, on écrit Star Trek !
Second : Why people who defends Disney (Pixar) always forget to talk about the copy made for the lion king and atlantis ? Steal is maybe more american than create.
Deuxièmement : Pourquoi les gens qui défendent Disney (Pixar) oublient toujours de parler des copie faites pour le roi lion et atlantis ? Voler est peut-être plus américain que créer.
yes this guy is totally wrong. take a look at the end of monsters inc, when sully is picking up the toys that boo is throwing around. you see him pick up a ball (from toy story) some other toys and NEMO! he picks up a orange clowfish with 3 white stripes. that was in 2001, this guy said his book was published in 2002. plus, andrew stantion said he came up with the idea 5 years ago (1998) and theyve worked on it ever since. this guy is just mad cause finding nemo is a huge sucess while his book is just getting off the ground.....
I have got a great idea for a cartoon about a mouse with big ears and it can talk - does anyone know if that’s been done before. Thinking of calling it Ickey.
I know Franck le Calvez. He was best man at my marriage. I lost touch with him, however, and haven't seen him in years. He's an incredibly bright and funny guy. I do know he was talking about this idea in '96, and that seems to be before the guy at Pixar said he came up with the idea. The idea, however, is pretty generic, following the plot of thousands of books and movies before it. It's not inconceivable to me that the Pixar guy could have had the idea independantly.
Good Luck Franck. Don't get "Pooh"ed.
Another point....BUGS LIFE has ALSO got HUGE similarities to Insektors, a French CG animation about bugs, made for TV in France a couple of years before Bugs Life. Basically they are ripping off French animation and illustration, repackaging it and reselling it. Expect "the Sisters of Knoxville" in 3 years time.
I believe the creator, writer and exec. producer of "Finding Nemo" was well aware of Franck le Calvez's Pierrot fish. I went to school with Andrew, and he was always good in borrowing bits and pieces of successful formulas and incorporate them into a collage of ideas. Other people's ideas... Other movies that Andrew was involved in, like "Monsters Inc" also, borrow alot of elements and ideas from other fellow students films.... no other comment... Mr. Franck le Calvez, I wish you good luck...
Maybe a motion to reconsider the case or file for a change of venue or judge would do the trick.
I think mister Franck le Calvez is trying to make a lot of money out of Finding Nemo. Pixar already had the idea for this film in '97, so that's about the same time that mister le Calvez started having his story ideas. And it's true: all clownfish look the same, they all live in anemones and we've all seen this plot somewhere before. If you ask me it's all just a big coinsidence. Try creating a completely new story, that nobody has ever thought of before. It's impossible, because there's always someone that has had a similar idea before you. Too bad for mister le Calvez!
40 comments already.
Conclusion: the justice will tell... Can I recommend we close this thread please ?
True, a clown fish is a clown fish, but the chances of two people thinking the (almost) exact same story line is very slim.Nemo's mom was eaten by a big fish, he was seperated from his father, and after many adventures the two were reunited.Pierrot's dad was eaten by a big fish, he was seperated from his mother, and after many adventures the two were reunited.Also two characters, a surgeon fish and a cleaner fish were involved in both stories, and also a few fish tanks.Something seems fishy!
just don't know who to trust no more.
there are several japanese animations very similar to some of their movies. they are "lion king" and "jungle taitei", "treasure planet" and "21emon", and "atlantis" and "nadia".
they just happened to be look alike, or simply stole some ideas from them.
hmmmmmm...
i guess disney wants to teach kids that guys with big money always wins.
I am no defender of Disney, but I am sure they have a paper trail that will prove whether or not they had the idea first nothing is done in this country without some kind of records. Do you think Disney does not have copyrights on their Nemo characters? Do you think they are not dated?
I see today that this lawsuit was thrown out, and the judge has ruled against M. Calvez's claims.
As far as some of these characters you are mentioning as having, (ahem) 'inspired' Disney's earlier animation films, please note that copyright laws were much more lax and not standardized internationally prior to the 1970's. It is entirely possible that the protections to those characters had expired and that they were in 'the public domain' when Disney 'co-opted' the ideas.
Many prior Disney movies were 'new' versions of old fairy tales, Cinderella - Sleeping Beauty, etc. And by the way, doesn't a parent die in just about every single feature animation Disney has done? It seems that is the only way they know how to frame a conflict that relates to younger viewers.
Can you get the book here in Australia yet? If so where can you buy them?
This post was spammed by the last commenter above, AJ, from addresses 203.166.96.235|236|237. So I am closing comments on this post. AJ, your ISP will get an abuse email.