A federal jury spoke unanimously on Friday in favor of Mr. Night Shyamalan and Apple, thus ending a trial in copyright in which the accused were accused of having stolen elements ‘An independent feature film when writing the series in streaming “serving”.
The seven -day trial in Riverside, California, which started on January 14, saw the director of Italian origin Francesca Gregorini claim up to $ 81 million in damages, alleging that Shyamalan and his collaborators had withdrawn Narrative elements of his 2013 film, “The Truth About Emanuel”, without credit.
Gregorini’s feature film follows a delusional mother who treats a doll as if it were a real baby, as well as a nanny who corroborates this false reality. Gregorini has seen significant similarities between his own film and “serving”.
Shyamalan said on Wednesday that he and the other creators of the series had never seen or heard of Gregorini’s film before the dispute, saying that the situation was “clearly, 100 %, a misunderstanding”.
“This accusation is exactly the opposite of everything I do and everything I try to represent,” he said in court. “I would never have allowed it. None of the people I work with would never do such a thing.
Gregorini said last week that she had been “shocked” when she had seen the trailer for the first time “serving” and that she thought that her film had been stolen from her. In addition to the elements of the plot, she spoke to the jury of a series of plans and scenes in “servant” that she thought she was diverted, like a scene where the nanny treats the doll as real even if she is Alone, and another where the nanny treats the doll as real even if it is alone, and another where nanny vanishes.
She said that she was advised not to sue and that it had led to repercussions on her career. But she said that she wanted to take a stand against this type of flight, which, she said, is widespread in industry.
“I wanted to keep the accused responsible for what they did and do my part so that it never happens to someone else in my sector,” she said in her testimony.
Defense lawyers argued that there were many differences between the two projects. “Servant” was a supernatural thriller, they said, while “the truth about Emanuel” was a drama in adulthood.
When he was at the helm, Shyamalan was questioned by his lawyer on the stereotypes and the elements which would have been taken at “Emanuel”. He said that there was nothing particularly original, for example in the fainting of a character.
“We have all seen it hundreds and hundreds of times,” he said. “Hitchcock did it in” Rebecca “,” Notorious “, perhaps” Sabotor “. It’s just one thing that no one has.
The jury screened the film and the first three episodes of the series from the start of the trial. They also heard competing experts on making films and Apple finances.
The verdict ends a five -year legal battle. The initial pursuit against Apple, Shyamalan and the writer Tony Basgallop, among others, was deposited in 2020, shortly after the first of “serving” on Apple TV+. The series has since concluded its series of four seasons.
A federal judge initially rejected the case, but the court of appeal of the 9th circuit relaunched it in 2022, finding a real dispute on the question of whether the two works are “substantially similar”. After the rejection of the application for summary judgment of Apple in November, the case was referred in judgment.
