MRC “Couldn’t Be Happier” With Dismissal Of ‘The Adjustment Bureau’ Lawsuit

COMMENTS (8)

• Philp K Dick’s estate must have finally seen Adjustment Bureau and realized they didn’t want his name associated with such a terrible film.

  Comment by bd — Friday February 17, 2012 @ 4:42pm PST  Reply to this post

• What a horrible film. Nolfi is lucky that MRC can’t distinguish talent. A shameful adaptation of the great PKD. Obviously the magic in the Bourne series is all credit to Tony.

  Comment by zenigata — Friday February 17, 2012 @ 5:34pm PST  Reply to this post

• MRC might have won on a technicality, but it was still all really sleazy. How in god’s name are they still in business?… Gotta believe a bad showing for TED should finally spell death.

  Comment by Anonymous — Friday February 17, 2012 @ 5:45pm PST  Reply to this post

• How many of Dick’s novels are public domain?

  Comment by Ragle — Friday February 17, 2012 @ 7:56pm PST  Reply to this post

• MRC is still a joke and dumb money. That company is a dumping ground for projects that can’t get made at a real studio. If MRC was actually good at making movies, then it would’ve been a major player by now. Instead, it’s just dumb money run by one Harvard grad that couldn’t cut it as an agent who is pulling a fast one on his old college pal to back the company with his tech billions in order for them both to play in the cool kids sandbox, but just like the talent they lack in making movies, they will never be cool. Another wasted opportunity by outsiders with tons of money that can’t capitalize. See: Relativity and Ryan Kavanaugh

  Comment by Mr. C — Friday February 17, 2012 @ 9:22pm PST  Reply to this post

• If all a judge did was decide that federal court wasn’t the best place for the lawsuit to be heard and state court was better, what’s with the “couldn’t be happier”?

  Comment by JennieC — Saturday February 18, 2012 @ 12:22pm PST  Reply to this post

• Attorney for Dick’s estate Justin M. Goldstein responded, “The judge’s ruling and our decision to dismiss the remaining portions of the federal case had nothing to do with the merits of any of the claims. The judge only concluded that state court is the appropriate forum for the dispute.”

  Perhaps Mr. Goldstein is unaware the ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS is online and people can read what the judge actually wrote at http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/cacdce/2:2011cv08913/515743/25/0.pdf?ts=1328860892.

  The order is mind numbingly technical but some things are clear without any special legal training or knowledge. The plaintiffs (the estate) made seven claims and the judge dismissed six of them. Simple math shows there was only one remaining claim so the estate couldn’t have dismissed remaining portions (plural) of the federal case. The claim that wasn’t dismissed was the estate’s request for a determination of whether “Adjustment Team” is in the public domain or validly copyrighted.
  In the judge’s own words, “Both sides correctly argue that federal courts have original and exclusive
  jurisdiction in actions arising out of the federal Copyright Act. 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a).
  Plaintiff’s peculiar declaratory cause of action requests the Court to determine whether
  Adjustment Team is or was in the public domain. Essentially, this is a limited request for
  a determination of validity of the copyright. Thus, the Court finds this cause of action is a federal question and the Court’s jurisdiction over this one narrow issue is proper.” The estate chose to dismiss this remaining portion of its complaint before the February 22nd deadline for the defendants to file a response to the complaint. People can draw their own conclusions about whether this decision had nothing to do with the merits of the copyright status claim.

  My understanding is that a California court can make a determination about that as it relates to resolving the contract disputes but a state court can’t order the Copyright Office to cancel the group copyright renewal registration “Adjustment Team” is included in. More accurately, the registration that includes a 1955 “Adjustment Team” that can’t be found in any bibliography or copy of the magazine the copyright registration says it was published in. Interestingly, the Copyright Office has no renewal registration for the 1954 “Adjustment Team” that is found in bibliographies and in the 1954 copy of Orbit Science Fiction No. 4 which I bought at a used book store about 50 years ago.

  Mr. Justin’s statement, “The judge only concluded that state court is the appropriate forum for the dispute” is a novel interpretation of, “The Court finds that judicial economy is best served in this instance by bifurcating the case: the federal copyright claim in this Court; the remaining six contract claims in state court.”

  Comment by Midnight Rambler — Wednesday August 29, 2012 @ 6:21am PDT  Reply to this post

• Of all the putridity, goonery and sheer psycho-pathologic behavior: the MRC’s mighty jackboot crushes the little and protesting nonprofit family trust of Philip K. Dick who only wanted just compensation for the use of their materials, labor, help and advice on the highly successful movie, “The Adjustment Bureau” using the technicality of implied “abandonment” of the federal suit by the trust, who probably could not withstand the withering expense. And it is states that it “couldn’t be happier” with the result. MRC, wealthy beyond most people’s wildest dreams and beneficiary of the $126 Millions it made on the movie, had an obligation to compensate the trust for its work and the use of the Philip K. Dick name. MRC did not invent the story, did not write the story and just ‘decided’ to take it for its own self. For shame. And they better not give such a reason as “Its good American Capitalism.” because it isn’t. I better not read that “We took a sow’s ear and made a silk purse.” And I’m just awaiting statements such as, “It’s legal.” and “We provide jobs for the industry.” No. Its just naked greed. And that’s my unqualified opinion.

  Comment by James W. Barclay — Wednesday January 30, 2013 @ 6:30am PST  Reply to this post