Hollywood is not all glamour, especially when it enters the courtroom. As history has shown time and again, any song clip, cartoon character, or even product placement featured in a film can potentially lead to a lawsuit. It’s up to our judges to determine which cases have merit, and which are just plain ridiculous – but it’s our job to have a little fun with them all. On that note, check some of the most noteworthy and outrageous lawsuits spurred by Hollywood films in the last two decades.

10. Not Actually Busted
The 2007 film “American Gangster,” based on a true story about a heroin dealer (played by Denzel Washington), included a scene in which several DEA agents searched the dealer’s home without a warrant, stole money, and committed other unlawful acts. At the end of the film, a caption explained that three-fourths of New York’s DEA were convicted as a result of those actions. Following the film’s release, four hundred DEA agents, who believed this mention would harm their reputation, sued NBC Universal, the studio responsible for the film. Their suit was eventually dismissed, however, because the film mentioned no names, and the agents’ claims could not be substantiated. And to make matters worse for the agents, they didn’t even get to meet Denzel.

9. Borat Likes His Drinkee
The 2006 film “Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan” resulted in several lawsuits filed by people who appeared in the film and claimed they were misled about the film’s true nature. One such case involved two University of South Carolina fraternity brothers, Justin Seay and Christopher Rotunda, who appeared drunk in one scene and made various racist and sexist comments. Their lawsuit against 20th Century Fox and three partner production companies stated that the boys were taken to a bar before filming to “loosen up” and that the film subjected them to “ridicule, humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional and physical distress,” as well as a “loss of reputation, goodwill and standing in the community.” Talk about a laundry list, huh? Both their request for financial damages as well as an injunction on the DVD release were denied. I guess that means no celebratory tequila shots/ ass paddling at the Frat house.

8. Court Room Clean Up
CleanFlicks is a Utah-based editing company that cleans up “objectionable” material from Hollywood films, such as “Traffic” and “Saving Private Ryan,” and resells them with an E (Everyone) rating. In August of 2002, a battle began between CleanFlicks and the Directors Guild of America (DGA). CleanFlicks filed a lawsuit against 16 director-members, seeking the court’s declaratory judgement that their editing practices [were] protected under federal copyright laws. CleanFlicks had heard rumors that the DGA was planning to sue them for copyright infringement, and wanted to preempt the DGA with their own legal action. In subsequent months, the DGA and several Hollywood studios filed countersuits against CleanFlicks (and other similar editing companies). The fight didn’t end until 2006 when a Colorado court ruled that CleanFlicks indeed violated federal copyright laws. The court ordered them to stop business and hand over all edited materials to the studios. CleanFlicks reopened in March of 2007 as a provider of “Movies You Can Trust,” which are essentially movies that CleanFlicks had reviewed and deemed appropriate for its largely Mormon audience. I guess that means no more late night screenings of “Traffic” for me and the wives.

7. “Imagining” Copyright Infringement
In June of this year, Yoko Ono and John Lennon’s sons sued producers of the 2008 documentary “Expelled,” a film which explores the Intelligent Design vs. Evolution debate. The film features a fifteen second excerpt of the late husband/father’s song “Imagine,” accompanied by written lyrics across the screen. Ono claimed that the song’s use violated federal copyright laws. However, as explained by MarketWatch.com, a financial and business news website, the song was used “as part of a social commentary in the exercise of free speech.” The court determined that the song was protected under “fair use,” which basically means a limited use of copyrighted material is acceptable without permission. Fair use applied because the song excerpt was intended to serve the public interest.

6. Goblet of “Weird”
When Warner Brothers set out to make 2005’s “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire,” they offered to compensate the Canadian folk band “Wyrd Sisters” for the film’s mention of a fictious band, similarly named “Weird Sisters.” The group didn’t want to be associated with the film, however, and they filed a $40 million lawsuit against Warner Brothers Entertainment Group, convinced the fictional band’s performance in the film would hurt their careers. The suit was dismissed in November 2005, and the Wyrd Sisters were forced to pay Warner Bros.’ $140,000 legal costs. So instead of receiving payment for some free (albeit indirect) publicity, the “Wyrd Sisters” paid for their infamy. I hope you fired your publicist, ladies.

5. A Slippery Case
In the 2003 film “Dickie Roberts: Former Child Star,” the title character, played by David Spade, injures himself on a Slip ‘N Slide because it’s improperly inflated and coated with oil. Upon the film’s release, the manufacturer of Slip ‘N Slide, Wham-O, filed a lawsuit against Paramount Pictures and Happy Madison Productions, the film’s producers. The suit requested the film’s removal from theaters so long as the Slip ‘N Slide scene was included, insisting that users of the toy would try a similar stunt. Thankfully (for the sake of not wasting tax-payer money), Wham-O’s case never made it close to trial. Perhaps the judge assumed Slip ‘N Slide users would read the instruction manual rather than turn to “Dickie Roberts” for guidance… Not that Dickie doesn’t know a thing or two.

4. “Natural Born” Violence
In March of 1995, drug-addicted lovers Benjamin Darrus and Sarah Edmonson attempted to rob a convenience store in Alabama. They shot and seriously wounded the cashier, Patsy Ann Byers, who was left paralyzed. Byers sued both Edmonson and Darrus, as well as Time Warner and Oliver Stone, claiming that a bank robbery scene in Stone’s 1994 film “Natural Born Killers” inspired the two real-life criminals. The case was ultimately dismissed in June 2002 when a Louisiana appeals court ruled that neither Oliver Stone nor Time Warner intended to inspire violence with the film and they could not be held responsible for the actions of the film’s audience. A handful of other violent, “copycat” murders were blamed on “Natural Born Killers” following the film’s release, but Stone and Time Warner consistently emerged on top.

3. Passionate Writing Has Its Price
In addition to all of the religious controversy surrounding Mel Gibson’s 2004 film “The Passion of the Christ,” legal problems related to the film arose, as well. Benedict Fitzgerald, the co-screenwriter of the film (with Gibson), sued Gibson for fraud and breech of contract in February of this year. Gibson had claimed he would not take any of the low budget film’s profits, but ended up paying himself $5 million for his work, as well as an additional portion of the $600 million worldwide revenue. Gibson and his counsel have attempted to seal the film’s budget from the public and have also denied the fraud charges. No decision in the case has been reached yet. Gibson better hope Jesus will rise up and save him from this one – or he could just rely on his own celebrity, I suppose.

2. Who Found Nemo First?
Following the release of 2003’s “Finding Nemo,” everyone seemed to lay claim to the lovable fish. French author Franck le Calvez said that Disney had stolen the film idea from his 2002 book “Pierrot le Poisson-Clown” (Pierrot the Clown Fish), and went to court to have all “Finding Nemo” merchandise removed from French stores. Calvez lost the suit because the judge ruled that the resemblance between the two fish was not “confusing,” as Calvez claimed. Similarly, in 2005, New Jersey Dentist Dennis G. Sternberg sued Disney/Pixar for plagiarism of his “Nemo”-like idea “Peanut Butter and the Jelly Fish,” which he had discussed with “Nemo” director Andrew Stanton several years prior to the film’s production. Sternberg eventually dropped the suit because he couldn’t afford the associated legal fees. Hopefully, “Nemo” won’t be found in more courtrooms anytime soon.

1. Court Wars Over “Star Wars”
In January of 2002, Lucasfilm Ltd. and Lucas Licensing Limited sued Media Market Group (MMG), the creator, seller and distributor of the animated pornographic film “Starballz,” a parody of various films including “Star Wars.” The plaintiffs claimed that MMG committed copyright and trademark infringement as well as trademark dilution (ie, they’re hurting the “Star Wars” brand.) However, since “Star Wars” was plenty famous before “Starballz” came along, and since no reasonable person would confuse the parody with the real thing, Lucas & Co. were not granted an injunction of the porno. In fact, MMG subsequently filed a $140 million libel and slander countersuit. Looks like Lucas will continue to have his “ballz” in a twist on this one.

Based on these cases, it seems like anyone could end up in front of a judge, even an animated fish. While some of these legal battles are a bit absurd from beginning to end, others achieved important goals such as protecting First Amendment privileges – which are essential for any creativity to flourish in filmmaking. Of course, so long as films are getting produced and distributed, these types of lawsuits will continue to surface in the courtroom. On the plus side, however, we can continue to blog about them.

If you have other lawsuits related to Hollywood films in mind, from the past couple decades or even earlier, feel free to drop a few words in the comment section.

Popularity: 14% [?]