Was "The Matrix" and "Terminator" plots stolen?

[Dave at the Movies]

I believe the case was thrown out but I'm not sure if she got it back in the courts or not. I don't know what to think. She may just be lying but it's hard to tell.


If she is telling the whole truth it is very messed up. I'm not a big supporter of intellectual property by any means(I don't believe you can own an idea) but if these studios really did steal her story ideas then that is screwed up and shows how big of hypocrites they are.




One thing that seems a bit interesting is that she says it was suppose to be all black characters. It may just be coiencidence and like I said before she may just be full of bull crap but I find it a bit interesting that they originally wanted Will Smith to star in the Matrix before they offered it to Keanu Reeves.


What do you think?

[Deleted]

I think the story of The Matrix is basically Cartesian dualism so unless this lady worked with Rene Descarte on that one - she's SOL because that story is not exactly new. The execution of The Matrix is what really made it stand out.

[B'Cup x]

I'm sure if there were legit issues about her creating 2 of the biggest sci fi franchises of all time, she would be far better known x

Listening to her synopsis of her stories, its a very VERY big stretch to claim that they were stolen. She sounds very VERY dillusional x

[Dave at the Movies]

Jun 15, 2011 11:03:32 GMT -5 B'Cup x said:

I'm sure if there were legit issues about her creating 2 of the biggest sci fi franchises of all time, she would be far better known x

Listening to her synopsis of her stories, its a very VERY big stretch to claim that they were stolen. She sounds very VERY dillusional x

She may be right in saying they lifted some of her ideas but honestly I don't think she is owed anything. If she is stupid enough to offer up a script for a movie to a big studio she might as well have signed it over. What in the hell was she thinking? Any idiot knows it is a one out of a thousand chance to beat a huge movie studio with all their lawyers. The game is already rigged so if you don't know how to play then well your screwed and she possibly got screwed and it is mostly her fault for not knowing the cutthroat business she tried to participate in.


This is why I'm against copyright and trademark and all that intellectual property crap. If you have good ideas and you are innovative you will figure out how to make money with your ideas even if people take them.


The big movie studios, the big record companies, and people like this woman want to live in the past before the internet existed and they are finding out the hard way that things change. You do not own your ideas. You can only own physical objects and land.

[Doctor Tull-eus S. Venture]

Regarding Terminator, James Cameron got taken to court by Harlan Ellison, IIRC, since the instances of a war-torn future and time travel to the past were in Ellison's stories before Cameron made the film.

They settled out of court, and Cameron gave him an acknowledgment in the film credits.

[Dave at the Movies]

Jun 15, 2011 11:10:19 GMT -5 Doctor Tull-eus S. Venture said:

Regarding Terminator, James Cameron got taken to court by Harlan Ellison, IIRC, since the instances of a war-torn future and time travel to the past were in Ellison's stories before Cameron made the film.

They settled out of court, and Cameron gave him an acknowledgment in the film credits.

Yeah I've heard of that one too and I think it is bullcrap. As if the guy came up with the idea of post-apocalypse and time travel and now everyone has to pay him every time they use both? Please. I'd like to call him up and tell him that H.G. Welles says hi. lol

[Deleted]

Here's what I got from that interview:

"Someone stole my ideas and repurposed them into two movies, even though I stole the stories from the Bible and repurposed them into a book."

Its like when a rapper who samples a classic rock song tries to sue someone else for inappropriately using their music.

[Dave at the Movies]

Jun 15, 2011 11:18:26 GMT -5 @personman01 said:

Here's what I got from that interview:

"Someone stole my ideas and repurposed them into two movies, even though I stole the stories from the Bible and repurposed them into a book."

Its like when a rapper who samples a classic rock song tries to sue someone else for inappropriately using their music.

Not quite. Rappers/MCs actually have to pay the band or whoever owns the copyright on it or else they get a huge lawsuit made against them where they have to pay out the ass much more than what it would have originally cost just to pay them originally to use it.

I don't agree with rappers getting sued and I don't agree with bands suing other bands for little pettily stuff such as a guitar riff . I understand the argument but how much is this crazy thing called intellectual property really cover and why is it a group of people on a jury or some guy or girl in a silly black robe who may know nothing about music get to decide it?

[YAKMAN is ICHIBAN]

Jun 15, 2011 11:08:30 GMT -5 Dave at the Movies said:

This is why I'm against copyright and trademark and all that intellectual property crap. If you have good ideas and you are innovative you will figure out how to make money with your ideas even if people take them.

How? If you can't enforce a copyright, ANYONE can reproduce your work and sell it themselves, or distribute it for free!

[BlackoutCreature]

Ok, I'm not listening to this. I have more important things to do then listen to some whiney lady complain about money she's not really owed. Such as writing a criticism about such whiney lady.

I will just say that I always found the Terminator movies to be very similar to the 1966 Doctor Who story "The War Machines". It involves a machine meant to centralize and control the military forces of the Western World gaining sentience (or becoming self-aware), deciding machines were better then people, and taking over the world itself. It's opposed by a time-traveler from the future. It's not an exact match, but it's close enough that the DVD release of "The War Machines" actually acknowledges the great similarities in its information text.

So unless the story Miss Stewart claims was plagiarized predates 1966 and she also has the BBC listed in her lawsuit, then I doubt she has much of a case. In anyways, I imagine the writers of "The War Machine" were probably influenced by an earlier source material themselves.

[jrcz]

The Star Wars plot was basically the same the plot as in one old japanese movie. I always forget its name.

[Urethra Franklin]

Well, here's a question that doesn't necessarily relate to this case, but situations like this in general: What if somebody lifts an idea without consciously knowing it?

For example, I do stand-up. I thought that I had come up with a really funny bit not that long ago and I tried it out on a buddy. He said "I like it, but Dave Attell has a really similar joke." So I looked it up and, sure enough, his bit was incredibly similar to mine. I had never heard it before, but I've ditched my joke because it will look like I plagiarized it.

I think it's entirely possible for people to have similar ideas and I don't think they should be monetarily punished for that. The key is, though, proving that you came up with them independently. Now that's the tricky part.

[Citizen Zero]

Jun 15, 2011 11:29:00 GMT -5 YAKMAN is ICHIBAN said:

Jun 15, 2011 11:08:30 GMT -5 Dave at the Movies said:

This is why I'm against copyright and trademark and all that intellectual property crap. If you have good ideas and you are innovative you will figure out how to make money with your ideas even if people take them.

How? If you can't enforce a copyright, ANYONE can reproduce your work and sell it themselves, or distribute it for free!

Yeah, tell that to the guys that created Superman.

[Dave at the Movies]

Jun 15, 2011 11:29:00 GMT -5 YAKMAN is ICHIBAN said:

Jun 15, 2011 11:08:30 GMT -5 Dave at the Movies said:

This is why I'm against copyright and trademark and all that intellectual property crap. If you have good ideas and you are innovative you will figure out how to make money with your ideas even if people take them.

How? If you can't enforce a copyright, ANYONE can reproduce your work and sell it themselves, or distribute it for free!

Maybe so but what makes you think copyright is being enforced? The music industry which is basically in Los Angeles is falling apart because they are too set in their old ways to change with the times and accept that the internet exists. The movie industry hasn't been hit yet but that is mostly because movie theaters still exist and they do a much better job at protecting their stuff and keeping it from leaking.


If you are a good musical artist or film maker you do not need intellectual property and you do not need to use the government as your personal enforcers. You will find a way to make it.

Take a look at the new hip hop group Odd Future(OFWGKTA). They originally put all their stuff up online for free and they got big on their own because they are good. It wasn't manufactured crap that has to be protected by copyright. No one can do what they did unless they do it in their own way. If someone steals their lyrics fans will know and trash that group or rapper on the internet and their career will be over right there.

Jun 15, 2011 11:34:49 GMT -5 @jrcz said:

The Star Wars plot was basically the same the plot as in one old japanese movie. I always forget its name.

Yeah the funny thing about that is how often George Lucas loves to sue people for infringing on Star Wars. I'm surprised he didn't try to go after Space Balls. lol

[Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!!]

I dunno about this lady, but the premise of The Matrix certainly has more than a few similarities to Grant Morrison's "The Invisibles".

[Bob Schlapowitz]

Jun 15, 2011 11:38:11 GMT -5 Dave at the Movies said:

Jun 15, 2011 11:34:49 GMT -5 @jrcz said:

The Star Wars plot was basically the same the plot as in one old japanese movie. I always forget its name.

Yeah the funny thing about that is how often George Lucas loves to sue people for infringing on Star Wars. I'm surprised he didn't try to go after Space Balls. lol

He wouldn't have had a case. Parody is not considered copyright infringement.

[YAKMAN is ICHIBAN]

Jun 15, 2011 11:38:11 GMT -5 Dave at the Movies said:

Maybe so but what makes you think copyright is being enforced? The music industry which is basically in Los Angeles is falling apart because they are too set in their old ways to change with the times and accept that the internet exists. The movie industry hasn't been hit yet but that is mostly because movie theaters still exist and they do a much better job at protecting their stuff and keeping it from leaking.

The music industry did drop the ball by not figuring out a model like iTunes sooner, but just because people have the ability to download music for free over the internet doesn't make it moral or legal to do so. Movies take a bit more effort to download since they are larger files, so that might explain it.

If you are a good musical artist or film maker you do not need intellectual property and you do not need to use the government as your personal enforcers. You will find a way to make it.

Take a look at the new hip hop group Odd Future(OFWGKTA). They originally put all their stuff up online for free and they got big on their own because they are good. It wasn't manufactured crap that has to be protected by copyright. No one can do what they did unless they do it in their own way. If someone steals their lyrics fans will know and trash that group or rapper on the internet and their career will be over right there.

Just because some artists are able to be successful on that type of arrangement doesn't mean that the copyright system should be disregarded. I'm not sure where your hostility to it comes from. Thing are somehow less legit if they take advantage of a legal system designed to promote the arts?

[YAKMAN is ICHIBAN]

Jun 15, 2011 11:34:49 GMT -5 @jrcz said:

The Star Wars plot was basically the same the plot as in one old japanese movie. I always forget its name.

It took a lot of inspiration from Hidden Fortress, as well as from the work of Joseph Campbell who studied archetypes and mythology, etc.

[Dave at the Movies]

Jun 15, 2011 11:50:32 GMT -5 Bob Schlapowitz said:

Jun 15, 2011 11:38:11 GMT -5 Dave at the Movies said:

Yeah the funny thing about that is how often George Lucas loves to sue people for infringing on Star Wars. I'm surprised he didn't try to go after Space Balls. lol

He wouldn't have had a case. Parody is not considered copyright infringement.

Depends on what judge or jury you get. I've seen many videos on youtube pulled and even people sued over parody videos. That goes for songs as well.

The studio or whatever behind Weird Al has to pay the artists and get permission even though technically under the ridiculous copyright law it says that you can't sue over parody. They basically have to bribe artists' major label studios(most notably Eminem's and Coolio's as two big examples in the past as it pertains to Weird Al) to not sue them. Eminem or Interscope wouldn't even let Weird Al do a music video for the Lose Yourself parody.

[Dave at the Movies]

Jun 15, 2011 12:02:47 GMT -5 YAKMAN is ICHIBAN said:

Jun 15, 2011 11:38:11 GMT -5 Dave at the Movies said:

Maybe so but what makes you think copyright is being enforced? The music industry which is basically in Los Angeles is falling apart because they are too set in their old ways to change with the times and accept that the internet exists. The movie industry hasn't been hit yet but that is mostly because movie theaters still exist and they do a much better job at protecting their stuff and keeping it from leaking.

The music industry did drop the ball by not figuring out a model like iTunes sooner, but just because people have the ability to download music for free over the internet doesn't make it moral or legal to do so. Movies take a bit more effort to download since they are larger files, so that might explain it.

If you are a good musical artist or film maker you do not need intellectual property and you do not need to use the government as your personal enforcers. You will find a way to make it.

Take a look at the new hip hop group Odd Future(OFWGKTA). They originally put all their stuff up online for free and they got big on their own because they are good. It wasn't manufactured crap that has to be protected by copyright. No one can do what they did unless they do it in their own way. If someone steals their lyrics fans will know and trash that group or rapper on the internet and their career will be over right there.

Just because some artists are able to be successful on that type of arrangement doesn't mean that the copyright system should be disregarded. I'm not sure where your hostility to it comes from. Thing are somehow less legit if they take advantage of a legal system designed to promote the arts?

Why is it not moral to download music? It isn't physical property owned by someone. This is my biggest problem with intellectual property. It supposedly protects copyrighted ideas by saying you can't copy something that you physically own. That means what you buy, such as a CD, means you really don't own it. It means the person who made it still technically owns it and they are only allowed to do that with threat of violence from the government.

That sounds a lot more like renting than owning if you ask me. You can say that downloading music is immoral but I find that to be way more immoral.



Copyright law does not promote arts. Intellectual property actually stifles new ideas because every idea has to come from a previous idea. Intellectual property or copyright really just promotes rich people's pocket books.

I'd like to see an independent artist such as Tech N9ne or Atmosphere(Slug) sue a huge record studio like Interscope for using their songs. You really think they have much of a chance of winning?



If the copyright laws were really so brilliant in any way they wouldn't have tried to sue John Fogerty for "plagiarizing" himself. Such bullcrap.