Superman Lawyer Claims Warner Bros. Lawsuit Is A SLAPP

from the slapp-back dept

Thu, Aug 19th 2010 12:30am — Mike Masnick

Earlier this year, we wrote about the odd decision of Warner Bros. studio to personally sue Marc Toberoff, the lawyer who successfully represented the heirs of the creators of Superman to win back some of their copyright, by using copyright's termination rules. Toberoff is making a career of this, and has been helping numerous other content creators start the process of reclaiming rights using the termination process -- which makes him somewhat... disliked in the entertainment industry. Still, to sue him personally seemed quite extreme. As we noted at the time, the lawsuit seemed to be based on the idea that Toberoff is a jerk and a savvy business person. As we noted at the time, that doesn't appear to be illegal.

Not surprisingly, Toberoff agrees, and he's filed to dismiss the lawsuit under California's anti-SLAPP law (one of the most comprehensive anti-SLAPP state laws), claiming that the entire lawsuit is just an attempt to shut him up. Matthew Belloni, at the link above, isn't convinced this is a real SLAPP situation, but notes that it could make the case a lot more interesting, as Warner Bros., will likely have to prove its case much faster than planned. And, if Toberoff wins, he could also win legal fees and open up a stronger case for Toberoff to file a countersuit for "malicious prosecution." If this goes according to Toberoff's plan, Warner Bros. might regret this particular lawsuit even more than they regret losing some of the rights to Superman...

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copyright, marc toberoff, slapp, superman, termination
Companies: warner bros.

16 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Pierre Wolff (profile), 19 Aug 2010 @ 1:29am

Nice poker play
Sounds like checking the bet in poker only to have the other player think you have nothing and raise you, only to have you raise him/her back in a big way and for much more than has you simply called the cards :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2010 @ 4:58am
  
  Re: Nice poker play
  Lawsuits are generally much like poker. Attempts to seek a settlement are similar to bluffing.
  
  I got four aces.
  
  Ok, I fold, here is $2k, I don't want to lose anymore by staying in.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2010 @ 5:05am
    
    Re: Re: Nice poker play
    and the statutory maximum is like the cap too.
    
    So you can bluff (seek huge damages and ask for a settlement) and hope the other side folds (settles).
    
    The other side can call (continue the lawsuit and not fold).
    
    The other side can bet (counter sue).
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jay (profile), 19 Aug 2010 @ 2:12am

It might be simpler to say that he was holding a straight, while you held 3 aces and one more just appeared. ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cc (profile), 19 Aug 2010 @ 3:32am

I don't have time to go through the lawsuit docs, so can anyone tell me under what pretext Warner is suing this guy in the first place?

Perhaps anti-SLAPP is the right way to go, seeing Warner appear to be doing this to shut him up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2010 @ 4:47am

It just amazes me how much the government has spoiled these big corporations. They almost always give them their way and when they don't get their way they throw a huge tantrum. They're like little children.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ima Fish (profile), 19 Aug 2010 @ 4:54am

From what I read Warner Bros. sued Toberoff because Toberoff was taking advantage of content creators to file his lawsuits and get the proceeds of the copyrights himself.

Let's assume that it's true. Let's assume that Toberoff was ripping off the content creators. Even if that is true, that does not give Warner Bros. standing to bring a lawsuit.

So as far as I'm concerned, Warner Bros. lawsuit fails on its face and should be dismissed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- cc (profile), 19 Aug 2010 @ 6:26am
  
  Re:
  TY.
  
  If I were one of those content creators I would feel seriously offended by Warner's behaviour.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Matt (profile), 19 Aug 2010 @ 10:52am
  
  Re:
  Wait, why not? Warner Bros. is harmed by the conduct, and it is an unfair and deceptive act or practice. If Toberoff's clients are not actually receiving any benefit from the lawsuits at all then Warner Bros. has a case. If the plaintiffs are merely knowingly getting a bad deal, Warner Bros. should probably lose. It still has standing - it can complain about another's harmful breach of duty, even if the duty wasn't owed to it - but here it will have no ability to prove the breach. The plaintiffs apparently thought it was a good enough deal to enter into it. Apart from the pot-calling-the-kettle-black issue of the content industry complaining about the unfairness of copyright rules, Warner Bros. has a valid point here. I do not know if Toberoff is one, but unscrupulous lawyers have made an industry out of exploiting stupid IP law to benefit themselves at the expense of society (and sometimes their clients).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nina Paley (profile), 19 Aug 2010 @ 5:54am

monster fight
It's like Godzilla vs. Mothra.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2010 @ 6:43am

Re:
So your idea of supporting the military is exploiting them to promote your advertising campaign?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2010 @ 7:19am

"warn a brother"
LOL
up up and away
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seamus, 19 Aug 2010 @ 10:20am

Spell out acronyms
Using acronyms may make you sound smart and in the know, but failing to spell them out so people don't know what you're talking about is annoying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2010 @ 5:32pm
  
  Re: Spell out acronyms
  or maybe he can start a page with a permlink somewhere on the techdirt homepage (www.techdirt.com) called common acronyms where Mike can list all the common acronyms used on Techdirt and others can comment and add their own.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2010 @ 5:33pm
    
    Re: Re: Spell out acronyms
    In fact I think that most blogs should probably have included a permlink that links to common acronyms that get updated periodically. BTW, this idea is not patentable.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 19 Aug 2010 @ 5:34pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Spell out acronyms
      (common acronyms used in that specific blog that is)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]