A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea - Page 2

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

I can't speak to the gatekeeping process in the legal profession, but when I started out in the movie business, I was a first reader for a major studio. If some idiot who thought he could write actually sent in a script, and I okayed it and by a miracle it got made, and the studio lost money and earned a reputation as greedy producers of crap, who should be blamed?

Certainly not the fellow who sent in the script. It wasn't his job to know better. It was mine.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

Nice try, but the analogy doesn't work.

With a movie, it's the studio who makes it. That's why they buy the script and, with occasional exceptions, have the right to do whatever they want with it thereafter. Proceeds from the film go to the studio, subject to any royalty obligation to the writer.

With a law suit, it's the plaintiff who brings it. The plaintiff hires the lawyer but keeps the claim. Unless the lawyer acts improperly (which can happen), the plaintiff retains control over all major decisions, including when and whether to settle -- or drop the suit. Recovery from the suit (if any) goes to the plaintiff, subject to any fee arrangement previously agreed to with the lawyer (which is subject to limitations under the ethics rules).

Most importantly, the barriers to entry aren't the same. The courthouse is generally open to anyone with a filing fee. Even that can be waived under certain conditions. Cheap or even free representation can be found from Legal Aid or the pro bono programs offered by many major firms (although that's getting tougher). If nothing else, a plaintiff can proceed pro se (i.e., without a lawyer), and judges will bend over backward to give them every break. But a screenwriter can't make a film without a production company, actors, crew and a lot of money. Page to screen doesn't happen unless somebody invests.

In other words, they aren't analogous. Not even a little.*

You're right about one thing: Attorneys are supposed to be gatekeepers. We're supposed to tell people when their idea for a suit is no good. For every nutty case you read about, there's at least a dozen more that good attorneys kept people from filing.

Still, you'd be amazed at the determination of some plainitffs. Some will keep shopping around until eventually they find a guy with a law license who's dumb enough or desperate enough to take the case.

M.

*Before someone mentions it, yes, I'm aware of certain securities class action lawyers who drummed up their own plaintiffs and paid them off. The most notable of them are now serving jail terms for doing so.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

My analogy was strictly between the first script reader and the attorney whom you acknowledge should be a gatekeeper--and where ultimate blame should be placed. My post opens with a clear subject (gatekeepers) and closes where I squarely place blame (gatekeepers). The studio/courtroom analogy you made and you shot down is irrelevant to my point (even though some readers charge fees).

When you say, "Still, you'd be amazed at the determination of some plaintiffs. Some will keep shopping around until eventually they find a guy with a law license who's dumb enough or desperate enough to take the case," my question becomes: Isn't it those very fringe "attorneys" you speak of who should be singled out as giving lawyers bad names?

In my opinion it's unfair to point the finger at the "contemporary plaintiff," who has no business knowing better, as the reason lawyers get unfairly criticized. Blame it on the gatekeeper not doing their job.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

If you've read my whole post carefully, then you should note that attorneys are not solely responsible for guarding the gates to the courthouse. The American legal system is famous for its openness, and one of the byproducts of that openness is that it's subject to abuse. That's why I mentioned pro se plaintiffs, who have a long and illustrious history of burdening the system with frivolous claims like the ones advanced here. Some of them become quite skilled at gaming the system.

Really? Even after you've seen a classic example in this thread of someone being told, by a lawyer, that their claim makes no sense but yet who insists on continuing to assert it?

Some attorneys believe that everyone's entitled to their day in court, no matter how far-fetched their claim. In the abstract, it's kind of a noble principle.

M.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

I'm also a lawyer, and will agree with Michael that this claim would not go anywhere. What's your damage? That your favorite show isn't the way you remembered it? How does that harm you? You need standing to sue, and consumers in this case do not have that.

I will also add, on the subject bringing claims without merit, that lawyers don't do anything that clients don't ask them to do.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

Mr. Reuben--so now you're placing the blame on misguided people for being persistent?

To continue with my analogy: It took me 19 years and more than 170 rejections to get a respectable literary agent. It was the hardest thing I ever did in my life. Even harder than selling a script. Was I supposed to quit and believe I had no talent because someone told me so?

It is the duty of the gatekeeper in any field to say "no" one times or 170 times if a "no" is warranted. Dumping the blame on misguided persistence doesn't let bottomfeeders who should know better escape responsibility.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

Indeed I am. You, OTOH, seem to think that, if someone is told by 170 lawyers that their case is frivolous, but the 171st lawyer is willing to file it, the fault lies with the legal profession. You're entitled to your opinion, but we'll have to agree to disagree.

M.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

I just can't help but admire persistence. It's the only talent I really have.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

If I were a betting person, I'd wager that the reaction to this Fugitive Fiasco will be for CBS to kill the release of Seasons 3 and 4. Maybe even S2 V2. Just a gut feeling.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

I would agree to agree that for many individuals--and companies--their first reaction to perceived injustice is not to communicate, negotiate or compromise, it's to lash out for legal action. This knee-jerk response for courtroom satisfaction has created what some call a culture of litigation. I have no doubt its backlash is not flattering to respected members of the legal profession.

On placing blame, however, I will agree to disagree with Mr. Reuben, and would like to clarify his characterization of my position.

He wrote, "You, OTOH, seem to think that, if someone is told by 170 lawyers that their case is frivolous, but the 171st lawyer is willing to file it, the fault lies with the legal profession."

No, I do not think the fault lies with the entire profession. I think it lies mostly with that 171st lawyer (and his ilk). He should be the one singled out in this thread as giving the legal profession a bad name because no matter how off-the-mark or persistent the "contemporary plaintiff" may be, it takes that 171st lawyer--in some form--to empower him.

I do agree misguided plaintiffs are a component of the problem. The writer (and idealist) in me wants to believe that instead of placing blame, however, my energies would be better spent trying to change the chemistry of "the contemporary plaintiff," not for the sake of swollen dockets or lawyers' reputations (they're an easy target no matter what), but for the larger sake of community, of the relationship between everyday folks who feel their voice can't be heard any other way.

I don't know what the answer is, but I've enjoyed this exchange, and my mind is already turning with ideas.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

Carabimero,

Slightly off topic--

Congratulations (seriously) on being persistent. I hooked up with a respectable literary agent about six months ago. I'm currently working on two books. For the first one (which is nearing completion), I didn't need an agent or even a lengthy proposal; this is most likely because it is completely academically-oriented. For the second book, which is more pop-rock oriented (and which has a much better chance of selling well), the Introduction and Proposal are completed, and I am currently completing the first three chapters so that my agent can begin to pitch it seriously. In any event, persistence does pay off.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

I have to agree that there is no real basis for a law suit. While there might be a bit of 'wiggle' room between 'restoration' and 'replacement', the bottom line is that CBS can do whatever they want with the property. They can try or not try to get all the music issues resolved or they can just chuck the enite score and replace it. It's really their call.

While I don't agree with it, there really isn't a whole lot that we as consumers can do about it. The only way we have of voicing our opinion is with our money. Either we buy or don't buy the next set of The Fugitive. That sends the message to CBS and the studios faster and louder than anything else.

On the other hand, all of the negative press that CBS has gotten over this issue will certainly have an effect. This has really come back and bitten them in the ass. They will either avoid making the same mistake on the next set or they will simply not release the next set. We'll just have to wait and see.

I seriously doubt that any more statements from CBS will be forth coming on this issue. They have already 'duck and covered.'

If I had to venture a guess, I'd say that this has killed any future releases of The Fugitive. I feel bad for the fans of the show but again, there isn't much that the consumers can do.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

Ockeghem, congrats on your books. I wish you well with both of them. It sure can be difficult, but you are much wiser than me. I, unfortunately, chose the field of selling fiction, which I can tell you from experience is perhaps the toughest nut of all to crack (I actually may be the nut in the equation!). One agent told me his competitive acceptance rate was .001 of one percent. That sounds high to me.

Back on topic (not that misguided plaintiffs was ever supposed to be the topic): I've been thinking about how society might transform the engine of what Mr. Reuben labeled the "contemporary plaintiff." It seems to me any solution would be neither singular nor direct.

Here are some thoughts, some of which I have posted in another forum in a different context.

Most folks go about their day-to-day activities as best they can, solving their little problems as best they can. How they get rewarded for their choices, and what impedes them—that’s the key. If I’m an employer, and I can create an atmosphere in my company where a person wouldn’t lie—not because it’s wrong or because it’s inconsistent with what the organization approves of—but simply because you can’t lie and still succeed in that company—that would be a worthwhile aspiration. Working in an environment where people set goals and standards and hold one another accountable. Where they can actually see profit come from honesty.

Sounds great, sure. How would I do it? Perhaps a large part of the secret is in supporting people, nurturing what’s best in them and developing their strengths rather than expecting them to have blind allegiance or loyalty to an employer. It doesn’t have to be self-interest versus doing the right thing. Many people, including myself, are so fixated on the things we think we have to do to "win." If you take those particular choices away, or make them profitless, people won’t give up. They’ll figure out something else. Here's the transformative element, in my opinion: People who see some prospect for advancement can change, but people who feel like no matter what they do, nothing will improve—there's a prime candidate for "contemporary plaintiff."

Whatever the solutions, I believe the most effective ones will have little do to with the legal system itself.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

Carabimero,

Thanks. I've never tried to write fiction; I honestly would not know where to begin with that genre. My books are (as you figured) non-fiction. Best wishes with your projects and hopes.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

Thanks....I made it even harder on myself by not writing genre fiction (not that genre work isn't hard). For some reason I'm more inspired to write what they call "contemporary literary" novels. One agent told me I picked the toughest job in the world. He said, "You're writing novels about why people do what they do. You can't get anymore complicated than that." Then he promptly rejected my book, saying it was "too different." Three years later, when I sent him my next novel, he rejected it as well, saying it was "too familiar."

It feels good after seven books to finally have a hint of success, and I sincerely appreciate your comments.

I may end up doing my next book about a persistent, misguided fellow who believes he deserves his day in court. It could be funny and moving and, if I'm lucky, enlightening.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

I think the fall out from this situation is there will be hestitation to purchase any future TV Shows from CBS/Paramount. I know I will wait for reviews to tell how bad the music replacement is. Since the warning on the back of the package really doesn't tell me anything, I have to wait until someone else has viewed the set to tell me what's missing. I guess this will reduce impulse sales. Whether over all sales of CBS TV product is reduced, time will tell. Vote with your wallet instead of filing a lawsuit.

Re: A "The Fugitive DVD" Law Suit Plea

Vote with rational but firm handsigned mailed letters, too!