Hey, all. Sheridan here. You should probably grab a cup of coffee and settle in because I’m about to discuss some difficult and tricky subject matter.
Please Note: I am NOT aware of all of the facts concerning this issue, but I felt that I should address it due to the volume of inquiries I was receiving about the future of this website.
For those of you who aren’t currently aware, this appeared online this morning:
A Long Island screenwriter was slapped with a $15 million federal lawsuit for posting 20th Century Fox movie scripts on the Internet — including a major comic-book flick still in the works, court papers say.
Patricia McIlvaine, of Mount Sinai, said she maintains a script database that she was using to help educate other screenwriters.Fox, owned by The Post’s parent company, News Corp., declined comment.
You can find that article here: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/web_script_uit_QGbPfYJSNMSsmTm0RIGphL
After reading the article I tweeted this through our Twitter account:
This is why we respond immediately to studio removal requests and DO NOT post/trade in development scripts…
I should probably have sat down then and typed this response instead of limiting myself to 140 characters on Twitter because I did not intend for that to sound dismissive, unsympathetic, or in anyway negative. I get several requests monthly for in development scripts and I simply wanted to point out that this is the very reason why I do not trade or respond to those requests. Also, some people have voiced concerns over my removal of scripts and script reviews from the site after receiving requests from a studio or producer. Again, this is why.
Creating and maintaining this website is a continual learning process. And, because of it, I’ve learned that there are certain unspoken rules regarding script websites. These are the same unspoken rules that have allowed sites like Drew’s Script-O-Rama and Simply Scripts to exist for as long as they have. In Drew’s case, fifteen years now. Fifteen years!
The rules, which I actually learned from Don over at Simply Scripts, are simple (and have already been implied):
1. Do not make available a currently in development screenplay.
2. Do not make screenplays available until their respective films are released in theaters or on home video.
3. Respond immediately to studio requests.
Now, someone has posed to me a series of questions concerning all of this that I feel raise very valid points, and rather than respond to them privately, I’d like respond to them here, publicly, so that some light can be shed on the matter.
First, regarding the removal of scripts and script reviews from this site; specifically, our recent review of Deadpool, this person states:
Please don’t remove the review. As long as you don’t quote the script, you can certainly write about it all you want. It sets a dangerous precendent for journalists. I understand you want to keep the studios happy, but this goes too far.
Script reviews are an iffy proposition these days as Christopher Eads (aka Carson Reeves) of ScriptShadow has made it a dangerous avenue in which to tread. Much like Roy Scheider “chumming s**t” into JAWS-infested waters.
I personally read every script review before it’s posted. And in a couple of cases, I’ve posted my own script reviews. It’s an easy subject to be torn on. Once I read John August’s and Craig Mazin’s view on the matter and also had the chance to chat with several other writers via our CUT TO: interviews, it became clear quite quickly how disrespectful it can be to the writer themselves to post a review of their in development script. As an aspiring writer myself, I can certainly understand the logic. We all should.
Like Craig Mazin has stated:
Here’s my problem. Here’s my one single problem. Sometimes, Scriptshadow posts reviews of screenplays that are in development.
So?
THE SCRIPTS ARE NOT DONE.
Let me repeat that.
THE SCRIPTS…ARE NOT DONE.
You would think writers would understand. And yet, so many don’t get it. When we write a draft, it’s a draft. It’s an attempt. We may find it absolutely awful and horrifying, and yet necessary as a basis for the next draft, which will be good. We may be writing the draft to address notes we think are completely misguided, with the optimistic (and often rewarded) belief that once the note-givers read the draft, they’ll finally see the light. We may be writing the draft to race a deadline, and we’ll fix it after. We may be writing the draft for an actor who is hopelessly miscast, and once that actor is gone, we can do it right.
And yes, of course, maybe we just stink, and this one isn’t very good.
Yet.
But on the other hand, sometimes I feel compelled to post a script review in the hopes that a single voice may be heard for a purpose. Yes, I thought long and hard about posting my review of Chad St. John’s script, Motor City, based on everything stated in the above paragraphs, but dammit, I love that script so much that it thoroughly pisses me off to even think someone asked for a version with more dialogue. The purpose of my review? It’s f*****g brilliant as-is! Please, make this film!
In the case of the Deadpool review, I’m a comic book fan from way back. I spent my fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth grade years creating my own comic books when I probably should have been focusing a little harder on math. During my ninth and tenth grade years, I could be seen carrying the latest issue of Wizard: The Guide to Comics with me everywhere. I was, undoubtably, a comic book geek. And, as evidenced by the several graphic novels and trade paperbacks sitting on the shelf behind me, I still am. And no one could be happier than me that comic books have hit the mainstream in a big way and good comic book films are finally getting made.
So, why post the review? Because, sadly, s****y comic book films are being made, too. Still. And, God help me, I do not want to see another s****y comic book-adapted property if I can absolutely help it. I agreed with some things Matthew Klekner said in his review, so I posted it.
Now, why did I remove the Deadpool review? Very simply, because I received this from Fox:
To Whom It May Concern:
We are writing concerning the recent review of the Fox film project Deadpool (the “Film”) which was published on the MyPDFScripts website at http://www.mypdfscripts.com/scriptreviews/matthew-klekner-reviews-deadpool.
While we appreciate your interest in the Film and your enjoyment of the script, the Film is a confidential project in development. Your purported review provides important qualitative details about character, plot, setting and mood, thereby violating Fox’s rights in and to the copyrights to the screenplay. As you are likely aware, copyright law protects an author’s right of first publication. Harper & Row Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539, 554-55 (1985). Fox therefore demands that you immediately remove and not re-publish your “review,” in whole or part.
The review is harmful to Fox and to the filmmakers hard at work on the project. Disclosure of uncontrolled information about the Film prior to its release diminishes the value of Fox’s rights in the Film and deprives the filmmakers of the opportunity to present the film to the public the way they intended. It also spoils the theater experience for fans who do not want to know even the rough storyline beforehand.
The Film and its screenplay are confidential. The script you reviewed is Fox’s property, and we consider copies of the script disseminated outside the development process to be stolen property.
Please confirm in writing upon your receipt of this letter that you have removed the infringing material.
This letter is without prejudice to any of Fox’s rights and remedies, all of which are expressly reserved.
For those of you who have never received a Cease & Desist notice from a studio, that’s what they look like. Each studio has their own version, of course, but they’re always pretty cut and dry and they’re not much fun to find in your inbox. Especially the bit about stolen property. It does sort of make you feel like a criminal.
At the end of the day it’s not how I personally feel about the Deadpool script or how big of a comic book geek I may be or how much I enjoy screenwriting. It’s about the legalities of what I’ve done. Legalities that are hard to argue with. Legalities that trump everything. And that’s why I removed the script review because it doesn’t matter what I think… they didn’t ask for my opinion, I’m not an active part of the development process, and they’re not really concerned with little ol’ me until it comes time for me to visit the local cinema and vote with my dollar.
So, then, is it fair that sites like io9 get to keep their review of the script online? Certainly, I have an opinion, but, ultimately, it’s not for me to decide.
Will I republish Mr. Klekner’s review? Certainly not. As I mentioned, the above notice from Fox is pretty cut and dry.
Moving on, and back to the scripts themselves, this person continues:
You have no problem retweeting a ‘sale’ by The Script Shack?
No, I don’t. Their $5.99 a script Black Friday sale is pretty damn good, considering you’ll usually pay $15 for a script, which I have done several times at different places around the internet.
And while we’re on the subject of scripts and copyrights, how do sites like The Script Shack, Script City, Script Fly, Script House, and Planet Mega Mall manage to legally do what they do?
No one has ever explained to me how their system of reprinting and selling scripts is actually legal.
Anyone?
Do you think the ‘fair use’ section of your website could also apply to her library?
Yes and no.
But it’s a delicate balance on a tight rope because it goes back to the unspoken rules of script websites, which she clearly violated by making available to the public several hundred in development scripts. And she also didn’t have a “fair use” notice posted. Granted, that shouldn’t matter much, but it does help.
Also, I have a clear and direct form of contact available on this site for communication with me. There is nothing like that available on a MediaFire page, which is what she was using.
Did Fox send her a cease and desist request? No, they didn’t. The very first time they contacted her was the lawsuit.
I’m not wholly aware of the entire course of events, but I do believe that her MediaFire account was deleted first. She then reposted all of the scripts, which subsequently resulted in the $15 Million lawsuit.
She was using an assumed online identity on a public forum and, again, I don’t believe there was anyway for the studio to contact her directly. Perhaps had there been, then this entire thing could have been avoided.
UPDATE: The commenter Mary Snow (seen below) has provided the following information:
When her Mediafire account was deleted, PJ contacted Mediafire to ask why. They assured her there was NO PROBLEM on their end, and indicated she had created some sort of glitch on her end. She had back-up of all files and reloaded them. No one at Mediafire told her they were either ordered to take down her account. Or, that some authority had taken down her account.
As for her identity — her profile on the message board you refer to has her email address which includes her surname. It still does as of today. Everyone knew her real name. Anyone could email her. Strange that this email address was spammed with a couple 1000 emails, and the provate messages in her message board account was hacked, a couple of weeks before private security showed up at her home to serve her with the lawsuit. Who did this? It would seem either Fox or their investigators may have before filing the suit. They clearly had plenty of opportunity to send a cease & desist letter.
I’m not a member of Done Deal Pro, so I wasn’t aware of the facts about her account. And as I have stated, I’m not aware of many of the details because all of the information I’ve received has been secondhand. Admittedly, secondhand is unreliable, at best. Again, I am addressing this issue simply due to the volume of inquiries I have received.
If you don’t post scripts that are currently in development, then what is your ‘unproduced’ section?
Our unproduced section is for screenplays that are currently NOT in active development or production.
I mean, I think we can all agree that Lem Dobb’s Edward Ford isn’t getting made any time soon.
How do I know? I don’t exactly. But by keeping an eye on the trades, industry websites, magazines, IMDb and friendly notifications from others I can usually discern fairly quickly if a long-unproduced script has finally clawed its way out of development hell. At which time I promptly remove it from the site.
This is a scare tactic by Fox, meant to make an example out of her. This message is meant for every script site online.
Agreed.
And not just every script site, but every script trader currently loose in the wild at this very moment. And if you look around the web today, you’ll find that the majority of the various sites featuring script trading lists have disappeared, so the message has obviously been received and understood.
You shouldn’t point fingers at others so quickly, especially someone as altruistic as this screenwriter that’s being sued. In short, you should find sympathy for someone who does exactly what you do and who does it for the same reasons you do.
I’m not pointing fingers and I do sympathize with her situation. It would not be a pleasurable experience, by any means, to wake up to a $15 Million lawsuit. Who wants that?
And, yes, we do the same thing: we share scripts, but I have self-imposed restrictions on exactly what I share, how I share it, and I abide by the three unspoken script rules. As does almost every other script website online (i.e. IMSDb, Screenplays for You, ScriptCrawler, The Daily Script, The Weekly Script, Horror Lair, Movie Page, Awesome Film, Comic Book Script Archive, etc.)
So, what lesson is to be learned from all of this? DO NOT publicly trade in development scripts. If you do, you risk becoming the catalyst of a major script leak. And a major script leak could result in a major lawsuit.
I also empathize with aspiring writers. I’m one myself. But is reading the most recent draft of that hot in development script really worth the potential legal hoopla? I don’t think so.
And, yes, I know that she was also cited for having several hundred produced screenplays as well. To that, I’m not sure what to say, exactly… because every website I’ve previously listed, including this site, is guilty of that very act. Up to this moment in time, that has been an accepted practice, but maybe the tides are turning. This lawsuit sets a difficult precedent, especially if decided in Fox’s favor on all counts.
Without any clear answers, the questions are quite difficult. Perhaps tomorrow this site will cease to exist. Perhaps every script website online will soon cease to exist. Perhaps publicly accessible screenplays, whether for free or purchase, will soon become a thing of the past.
Remember, legalities trump everything.
UPDATE: I’ve been asked to alter and paraphrase the questions posed to me due to privacy concerns raised by the individual who originally asked them. I have complied with that request.
I have also added details to the article as they have become known or available.
UPDATE 2: All files concerning this case can be found online here: https://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuit.asp?id=67553
I have purchased the files and I am currently reviewing them.
UPDATE 3: After reviewing the Complaint, my continued thoughts concerning this case seemed a little too much to add to this already overly long post, so you can read part two here: http://www.mypdfscripts.com/thelatest/concerning-the-15-million-script-trading-lawsuit-pt-2