Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ames.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!hao!ames!barry
From: barry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry)
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers,net.movies
Subject: Re: Ellison and TERMINATOR
Message-ID: <1022@ames.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 25-Jun-85 12:55:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: ames.1022
Posted: Tue Jun 25 12:55:25 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 28-Jun-85 00:14:30 EDT
References: <826@mtgzz.UUCP>
Organization: NASA-Ames Research Center, Mtn. View, CA
Lines: 48
Xref: watmath net.sf-lovers:8213 net.movies:6769

>A few people have mentioned the legal bruhaha about the film THE
>TERMINATOR and the payment that Ellison received on copyright
>infringment grounds for similarities to the two Outer Limits episodes
>that Ellison wrote.  I haven't seen much in the way of opinion about
>the situation.  I want to express an opinion.  I think it stinks.
>...
>Then Ellison and Bova wrote a story called "Brillo" about how a human
>is better than a robot to act as a policeman.  In some ways it reused
>ideas from Asimov and others, but nobody cared because it was a
>different approach to some of Asimov's ideas.  A TV network considered
>adapting "Brillo" into a series or a TV movie or something but the
>project never got off the ground.  That same netword did do a series on
>the concept that a robot policeman would have to overcome initial
>prejudice, but would be a good thing.  It is highly profitable to win a
>suit against a network and Ellison and Bova sued.  They apparently 
>demonstrated that "Brillo" inspired the concept of FUTURE COP and laid
>claim to ownership of the idea of a robot policeman.  They must have
>had a darn good lawyer but they won that one.  Science fiction fans
>everywhere applauded that a couple science fiction writers had won a
>suit against a big, bad corporation.
>....
>My impression is that Ellison is just a parasite who claims to be
>disgusted at how the film industry does not meet his high science
>fiction standards, yet when they try to play by the same rules that we
>expect from science fiction writers, he is right in there with his
>lawyer trying to make a fast buck.  Anyone else out there have thoughts
>on this.

	Sure do. I'm unfamiliar with the TERMINATOR matter,and don't
know if Ellison had good grounds for claiming plagiarism. But "Brillo"
was open-and-shut. "Future Cop" was an outright steal of Ellison's and
Bova's "Brillo" script. If you think a plagiarism suit is winnable in
court just by having a "good lawyer", you ought to look into the "Brillo"
case, and the laws on plagiarism generally, a bit more thoroughly. It's
very tough to win a plagiarism case, but Ellison had them dead to rights.
You might keep in mind that ABC and Paramount had some pretty good lawyers,
too.
	It's easy to sue someone, and even winning such a suit proves
nothing if it's settled out of court, since the defendant may have reasons
to want to settle with you even if they're not guilty. But to win such
a case *in court*, as Ellison and Bova did with "Brillo", against a team
of lawyers from two large corporations, is pretty damn conclusive. 

-  From the Crow's Nest  -                      Kenn Barry
                                                NASA-Ames Research Center
                                                Moffett Field, CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 	USENET:		 {ihnp4,vortex,dual,nsc,hao,hplabs}!ames!barry