It’s not just that it was a copy, it’s that the estate was in talks for an ER reboot, those died, and then The Pitt was announced with one of the principal actors from ER. It really reads like the estate thought it was getting a payday and is pissed it missed the check.
Oh, I don’t think they have a leg to stand on. A rando has a better shot at proving that some famous author stole their idea than this “only not a SLAPP because the courts decided it wasn’t” suit has.
Their contention is that WBTV recruited John Wells (ER Showrunner), R Scott Gemmill (ER EP/writer) and Noah Wyle (ER star) to develop an ER reboot. This isnt in question and all have been open about it.
The dispute is that when the ER reboot fell through, Crichton claims that they just carried on with the show under a different title. WBTV, Wells, Gemmill and Wyle claim that it is a wholly different project that did not evolve from the ER reboot, but just came along immediately after the reboot fell through, with the same group of people.
Yes, a lot clearly. They were hired to work on an ER reboot, which means that any work they did for that project is derivative of the rights held by the Crichton estate, which therefore has ownership stake and under their contract, any use of that material had to be approved by Crichton or his estate.
If The Pitt is proven to be the ER reboot reskinned, the Crichton estate are owed ownership stake, and a payout for violation of their contractual rights and for copyright infringement.
Fuck Skydance, but Crichton’s estate trying to shut down any medical drama because ER did a similar thing is stupid.
It ended, but what about The Good Doctor?
The Good Doctor was a remake of a Korean show.
TIL The Pitt isn’t an ER spin-off/sequel.
Obviously I’m not really into either, or I’d have probably noticed before now that Noah Wiley plays two different characters.
It’s not just that it was a copy, it’s that the estate was in talks for an ER reboot, those died, and then The Pitt was announced with one of the principal actors from ER. It really reads like the estate thought it was getting a payday and is pissed it missed the check.
There was a frozen rights clause in the original contract of ER that forbade a remake.
So they would have been fine with it if Noah Wyle hadn’t been in it? Wild to think they think they own the concept of Noah Wyle playing a doctor.
I thought they did reboot/bring back ER for a season?
The Pitt being in real-time really differentiates itself despite the similarities. I think the estate has a an uphill battle to argue
Oh, I don’t think they have a leg to stand on. A rando has a better shot at proving that some famous author stole their idea than this “only not a SLAPP because the courts decided it wasn’t” suit has.
The good doctor was already a copy.
What about House, M.D.? Should no one, ever, be able to make another medical drama?
That isnt the Crichton estate’s contention
There contention is they’ll find their case in discovery. Ie given enough time they can make it work.
I’m not sure why you view that as meaningful different than any medical drama.
Their contention is that WBTV recruited John Wells (ER Showrunner), R Scott Gemmill (ER EP/writer) and Noah Wyle (ER star) to develop an ER reboot. This isnt in question and all have been open about it.
The dispute is that when the ER reboot fell through, Crichton claims that they just carried on with the show under a different title. WBTV, Wells, Gemmill and Wyle claim that it is a wholly different project that did not evolve from the ER reboot, but just came along immediately after the reboot fell through, with the same group of people.
I forgot that the estate owned these people’s minds, experience, working relationships and future products.
What is their argument apart from base slavery? That four people were hired to be creative, were creative, and ended up making a show?
Crichton gets rights to his creative work but not those four?
Anything I’m missing?
Yes, a lot clearly. They were hired to work on an ER reboot, which means that any work they did for that project is derivative of the rights held by the Crichton estate, which therefore has ownership stake and under their contract, any use of that material had to be approved by Crichton or his estate.
If The Pitt is proven to be the ER reboot reskinned, the Crichton estate are owed ownership stake, and a payout for violation of their contractual rights and for copyright infringement.
Why would “any work” done for the project be derivative of the underlying IP? Keep in mind we are under a substantial incorporation standard.
Looking at the two substantial incorporation doesn’t appear present.