Monday, December 11, 2006

BL3: CUFADM02A Posting: “Finding Nemo”

Q: What is the Website Address for BBC News?

A: http://news.bbc.co.uk/

Q: After performing your Search, how many postings did your find?

A: I found 8 postings relating to this story.

Q: List the Title and Date of each Posting (in ascending date order i.e. from oldest to most recent)

A:
News - Disney sued in France over Nemo. 24 Dec 2003.
News - Finding Nemo case delayed. 29 Jan 2004.
News - Finding Nemo copy case begins. 24 Feb 2004.
Newsround - Frenchman claims he invented Nemo. 25 Feb 2004.
News - French author loses Nemo battle. 12 Mar 2004.
Newsround - Writer loses claim for Nemo. 13 Mar 2004.
News - Frenchman loses Nemo copy claim. 20 April 2005.
Newsround - Children's author loses Nemo case. 21 Apr 2005.

Q: After reading the postings in date order, write a summary in your own words outlining:

The initial claim and demands by Franck Le Calvez.

Some key features of the case in relation to the claim of Copyright and Trademark Infringement.

The final court ruling, key issues supporting the court’s ruling, and consequences for the various
parties involved.

A:
1. When finding Nemo was released, french writer Fracnk Le Calvez laid claims that some of the characters in the film were too similar to characters he had published in his book "Pierrot the clown fish". Calvez demanded the ban of all products that infringed on his character designs.

2. Mr Le Calvez claims that he invented the clown fish character "Pierrot, long before Disney created "Nemo", therefor a claim was made relating to a breach of copyright law. Mr Calvez's claims were later deemed unfounded due to the fact that Disney had drawn the Nemo character as early as 2000 and Mr Calvez's story was published in 2002. Mr Calvez however maintains that his character pierrot was registered in 1995.

3. The final ruling was that Nemo was created before Pierrot. The court even declared that Mr Calvez had knowledge of Nemo before he created Pierrot. Mr Calvez was ordered to pay 61,000 euros in costs and damages to both Disney and Pixar.

No comments: