George Lucas Shafted by British Court over Star Wars costume copyright

In 1976 Andrew Ainsworth was hired to make helmets for the Imperial storm troopers in the classic Star Wars films. . Mr Ainsworth made 50 helmets, for which he was paid £20 each. He also made equipment for other characters, earning about £30,000 from the Star Wars films. Aware of the demand for Star Wars memorabilia, in 2004 Ainsworth starting making and selling these helmets from the original molds.

Lucasfilm sued him in the United States. He did not defend the and a California court awarded $20million in damages against him. When Lucasfilm tried to enforce its judgment in Britain, the trial court ruled that the models were not sculptures and so did not have copyright protection, which would extend 70 years beyond the death of their creator. Instead he ruled that the models were industrial designs, which could be protected for only 15 years.

On December 17, 2009, The British High Court dismissed Lucasfilm’s appeal and said that the helmet and armor had a “utilitarian” rather than artistic purpose. They also ruled that Lucasfilm could not enforce its US copyright in Britain, but agreed that Mr Ainsworth did not own the copyright.

When asked how he might celebrate, Mr Ainsworth said: “Maybe we’ll go and find another galaxy.” Lucasfilms is considering an appeal to the new British Supreme Court.

This is a bad decision. Under U.S. law, the copyrightability of sculptural works is subject to a requirement that the work itself be a work of art, that is, a work of some minimal—but not necessarily meritorious—creative or artistic authorship.
 

Florida Federal Judge refuses to enforce Nicaraguan judgment against Dole Food

The tide is turning in favor of Dole Food in its decades old battle defending its use of the chemical compound dibromochloropropane (DBCP).   In an action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Osorio v. Dole Food Company, Judge Paul C. Huck refused
to enforce a $97 million Nicaraguan judgment under the Florida Uniform Out-of-country Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act..

Plaintiffs are 150 Nicaraguan citizens alleged to have worked on banana plantations in Nicaragua between 1970 and 1982, during which time they were exposed to the DBCP is an agricultural pesticide that was banned in the United States after it was linked to sterility in factory workers in 1977. Nicaragua banned DBCP in 1993. Defendants are Dole Food Company and The Dow Chemical Company.  Dow manufactured DBCP from 1957 until 1977, and Dole used DBCP on its banana farms in Nicaragua until the farms were expropriated by the Sandinista regime that came to power in 1979.

The judgment in this case was rendered by a trial court in Chinandega, Nicaragua. The trial court awarded Plaintiffs approximately $97 million under “Special Law 364,” enacted by the Nicaraguan legislature in 2000 specifically to handle DBCP claims. The average award was approximately $647,000 per plaintiff. According to the Nicaraguan trial court, these sums were awarded to compensate Plaintiffs for DBCP-induced infertility and its accompanying adverse psychological effects. Defendants have appealed the judgment to an intermediate appellate court in Nicaragua. That appeal is still pending.

Defendants raise several objections to domesticating the judgment. They contend that under the Florida Recognition Act this Court cannot enforce the judgment because (1) the Nicaraguan trial court lacked personal and/or subject matter jurisdiction under Special Law 364, (2) the judgment was rendered under a system which does not provide procedures compatible with due process of law, (3) enforcing the judgment would violate Florida public policy, and (4) the judgment was rendered under a judicial system that lacks impartial tribunals. The Court held that Defendants have clearly established their entitlement to non-recognition on each of these independent grounds.

Lead trial counsel for Dole was Andrea E. Neuman of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Los Angeles, CA,

 

Continue Reading...