<i>Decision of Note</i><br>Suit Seeking Public Doman Status for 'Buck Rogers' Can Move Forward

Chief Judge Conti had originally declined to rule in the case, reasoning that the production company — headed by Don Murphy, the producer of films such as Natural Born Killers, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and the Transformers franchise — didn't show that the project had made significant enough progress toward making the movie for there to be a viable legal controversy.

But now, with its third iteration of the complaint, thee district court judge said Team Angry Filmworks has a case. “Unlike the second amended complaint, which this court dismissed for lack of immediacy, the third amended complaint contains sufficiently specific allegations with respect to the timing of plaintiff's film production, assuming a declaratory judgment is entered in plaintiff's favor,” Chief Judge Conti said.

“Plaintiff attached to the third amended complaint a letter of intent from the executive vice president of Legendary Pictures outlining a clear and immediate timeline for the production of the allegedly infringing film,” the district judge added. “Plaintiff asserts, through the letter provided by Legendary Pictures, that the screenplay, casting, and previsualization can all be completed within three months and that the parties can begin 'making the film' within six months. These assertions represent a marked change from plaintiff's earlier briefings, which provided no specificity with respect to the timing of production or filming.”

Chief Judge Conti added: “While the court recognizes that the letter of intent from Legendary Pictures is nonbinding, and that there is a possibility that the infringing film may not be produced even if plaintiff secures a favorable declaratory judgment, the immediacy standard [of the Declaratory Judgment Act (DJA), 28 U.S.C. §2201(a)] does not require an absolute guarantee that the infringing product will be produced. … Here, the immediacy prong merely requires a showing by plaintiff that, but for the copyright dispute, 'the plaintiff would and could begin production immediately.' … Plaintiff has provided sufficient evidence to meet this standard, particularly in light of the practical difficulties that come with securing financing for a film whose subject matter is involved in a copyright dispute. As plaintiff explained at length, production companies, as a matter of course, do not finance movies when such disputes exist.”

Lead counsel in the case for trustee Louise A. Geer, David Aronoff of Fox Rothschild in Los Angeles, declined to comment.

Charles M. Coate, the lead attorney for Team Angry Filmworks from Abrams Coate in Los Angeles, said: “We're pleased by Judge Conti's thorough opinion, and in the event the dispute cannot be resolved, we look forward to establishing that this work, Armageddon 2419, has entered the public domain.”

*****
P.J. D'Annunzio is Federal Courts Reporter for The Legal Intelligencer, the Philadelphia-based ALM sibling of Entertainment Law & Finance.

Team Angry Filmworks' lawsuit seeking public domain status for science fiction hero “Buck Rogers” adventures is set to blast off now that the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania denied a request to dismiss filed by the trust that licenses Rogers material. Team Angry Filmworks Inc. v. Geer, 15-1381.

The Pennsylvania-based trust acting as the gatekeeper for “Buck Rogers” intellectual property threatened to sue after Los Angeles-based Team Angry Filmworks announced it was developing a screenplay without the trust's approval based on Armageddon 2419 A.D. — a 1928 novella by Philip Francis Nowlan in which Buck Rogers made his first appearance.

The movie company asked U.S. District Chief Judge Joy Flowers Conti of the Western District of Pennsylvania to declare that the copyright to “Buck Rogers” has expired, arguing that the trust's claims over the material amounts to interference with the production company's attempts to make the film by discouraging studios like Warner Bros. or Sony, which have expressed interest in the project, from financing it.

Chief Judge Conti had originally declined to rule in the case, reasoning that the production company — headed by Don Murphy, the producer of films such as Natural Born Killers, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and the Transformers franchise — didn't show that the project had made significant enough progress toward making the movie for there to be a viable legal controversy.

But now, with its third iteration of the complaint, thee district court judge said Team Angry Filmworks has a case. “Unlike the second amended complaint, which this court dismissed for lack of immediacy, the third amended complaint contains sufficiently specific allegations with respect to the timing of plaintiff's film production, assuming a declaratory judgment is entered in plaintiff's favor,” Chief Judge Conti said.

“Plaintiff attached to the third amended complaint a letter of intent from the executive vice president of Legendary Pictures outlining a clear and immediate timeline for the production of the allegedly infringing film,” the district judge added. “Plaintiff asserts, through the letter provided by Legendary Pictures, that the screenplay, casting, and previsualization can all be completed within three months and that the parties can begin 'making the film' within six months. These assertions represent a marked change from plaintiff's earlier briefings, which provided no specificity with respect to the timing of production or filming.”

Chief Judge Conti added: “While the court recognizes that the letter of intent from Legendary Pictures is nonbinding, and that there is a possibility that the infringing film may not be produced even if plaintiff secures a favorable declaratory judgment, the immediacy standard [of the Declaratory Judgment Act (DJA), 28 U.S.C. §2201(a)] does not require an absolute guarantee that the infringing product will be produced. … Here, the immediacy prong merely requires a showing by plaintiff that, but for the copyright dispute, 'the plaintiff would and could begin production immediately.' … Plaintiff has provided sufficient evidence to meet this standard, particularly in light of the practical difficulties that come with securing financing for a film whose subject matter is involved in a copyright dispute. As plaintiff explained at length, production companies, as a matter of course, do not finance movies when such disputes exist.”

Lead counsel in the case for trustee Louise A. Geer, David Aronoff of Fox Rothschild in Los Angeles, declined to comment.

Charles M. Coate, the lead attorney for Team Angry Filmworks from Abrams Coate in Los Angeles, said: “We're pleased by Judge Conti's thorough opinion, and in the event the dispute cannot be resolved, we look forward to establishing that this work, Armageddon 2419, has entered the public domain.”

*****
P.J. D'Annunzio is Federal Courts Reporter for The Legal Intelligencer, the Philadelphia-based ALM sibling of Entertainment Law & Finance.