Disney Enterprises and Buena Vista Pay Television filed a claim yesterday in Federal Court in New York yesterday against Dish Network claiming that Dish Network has been engaging in ‘unauthorized and unlawful distribution, transmission, copying and public display and/or performance of numerous, highly successful motion pictures owned and licensed by’ Disney.
U.S. District Judge John R. Padova has ruled that a recent lawsuit charging an act of molestation by Donald Duck in Epcot back in 2008 will go forward in Pennsylvania despite attempts by The Walt Disney Company to have the case moved to Florida.
According to the decision, the plaintiff, April Magolon, her fiance (a witness) and her doctors are all located in the state, justifying the decision to leave the case within its borders.
Magolon, who is seeking charges in excess of $50,000, has claimed that the incident has resulted in ‘severe physical injury, emotional anguish and distress including, but not limited to post-traumatic stress disorder.’
TMZ is reporting that designer Arman Mkrtchyan has filed a lawsuit in L.A. County Superior Court against The Walt Disney Company on the grounds that his work was used in Walt Disney Studios’ Alice in Wonderland without any compensation. Claiming that the Red Queen’s throne is a virtual clone of his own piece (and that he in fact had designed a matching set, representing each suit), Mkrtchyan is suing Disney for a ‘designer’s fee’ in the amount of $50,000.
If the case does go to trial, don’t anticipate it to be scheduled on the same day the Knave of Hearts is finally brought to justice for stealing tarts.
CNET News is reporting on a class action lawsuit recently filed on behalf on a group of minors and their parents which claims that Disney Internet Media Group (named as Walt Disney Internet Group) and Disney-owned Soapnet LLC along with co-defendants Warner Bros. Records, Ustream, Inc., Clearspring Technologies, Inc., Demand Media, Inc., Project Playlist, Inc., and SodaHead, Inc. were involved in tracking users’ internet activity even while accessing websites not owned by them.
Earlier today, The Smoking Gun published a claim filed by April Magolon of Upper Darby, Pennsylvania which claims that while visiting Donald Duck at Epcot Center [sic] in 2008, Donald had deliberately grabbed her ‘breast and molest[ed] her and then made gestures making a joke he had done something wrong.’ Magolon, who reportedly had her children with her, is suing Walt Disney Parks and Resorts for negligence and seeking in excess of $50,000, claiming to have suffered ‘severe physical injury, emotional anguish and distress including, but not limited to post-traumatic stress disorder.’
Suffering ‘pain, shock and mental anguish’ and an inability to perform ‘normal activities’ since tripping and falling along a walkway in Epcot, Judith Franzen of New York has filed a federal lawsuit against Walt Disney World / Disney Parks and Resorts last Friday. The complaint, which seeks an even one million dollars in damages, asserts that Walt Disney World was previously aware of the unnamed condition of the walkway which caused the accident on April 22, 2008 and that the resort was ‘negligent, careless, reckless and grossly negligent.’
Just how serious is Disney/Marvel about producing an Ant-Man movie? Few in the world are likely to be more interested than the children of comics author Jack Kirby who have named Ant-Man along with Spider-Man, Iron Man, the Fantastic Four, X-Men, The Incredible Hulk, The Avengers, Thor, Nick Fury a seemingly endless list of comics titles and specific issues in a lawsuit claiming they are the rightful (co-)owners of these creations.
Filed on March 9 in the US District Court in the Central District of California, the complaint filed by Lisa, Barbara, Neal and Susan Kirby as well as the estate of Kirby’s wife, Rosalind, rebquests a trial by jury, seeking unspecified damages against previous and current earnings on these properties of which Disney/Marvel has current control.
Making a very persuasive argument, particularly if it’s all true, the complaint inks a portrait in which a financially strapped Marvel purchased the comics from freelancer Jack Kirby ad hoc — sans contracts and that Kirby created everything on his own time in his own place of residence with his own tools so that he was at no time able to be considered ‘work for hire’ as Disney/Marvel has contended.
Marjory Marchand of New York filed a lawsuit in United States District Court earlier this weeking seeking damages in excess of $75,000 from Walt Disney World, Niki Bryan Spas and GF Spa Ltd. Through the complaint, Marchand stated that in July of 2008, as part of a Walt Disney World vacation, she participated in a private massage taking place at the Grand Floridian resort. It was during the massage that Marchand alleges she was violated sexually by a male masseur, resulting in ‘lack of trust, anger, irritability, anxiety, nightmares, panic attacks, feelings of abandonment shame, feelings of being unclean, fear of being alone, poor mood, feeling distracted, confused, and in self-doubt.’
Earlier this week, Icebox-Scoops of Brooklyn, NY filed a lawsuit against Disney in federal court claiming that Disney engaged in unfair business practices, effectually negating existing rights the company had obtained to create and market a line of cosmetics under the Tinkerbell name.
Tinkerbell (as opposed to Disney’s Tinker Bell) is owned by a company called Finanz St. Honore, B.V., who obtained the rights to Tinkerbell in 1951 from Great Ormond Street Hospital (Disney’s Peter Pan was released in 1953). Throughout the years, there has been little dispute to ownership of Tink and according to Finanz, the only limitation they have in regards to use of the fairy is that Disney’s representation of her cannot be replicated.
Alleging violation of the California Legal Remedies Act and the California Business Code, the class action claims that Disney has not fulfilled its promise of offering full refunds on Baby Einstein DVDs purchased since an uproar was caused over a report that determined that the videos had no positive intellectual effect on infants despite claims made on the initial product. Although Disney acquired Baby Einstein in 2001, the current refund offer which was intended to fend off a class action lawsuit of its own, only covers videos sold since 2004.