Warner Bros. asks for "Watchmen" call sooner

Thu Jan 8, 2009 12:46am EST
Email This Article |
Share This Article
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
| Print This Article | Single Page
[-] Text [+]

By Borys Kit and Matthew Belloni

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - January 20 could be D-day in the "Watchmen" dispute between Fox and Warner Bros.

Or rather I-day, when the studios have agreed to let a judge decide whether to issue an injunction against the superhero film's scheduled March 6 release by Warner Bros.

But Warners is asking that the hearing be moved up to as early as Monday because "time is critical," the studio argues in papers filed this week. The studio must soon commit tens of millions of dollars in marketing for a film it isn't sure it can release.

The injunction fight stems from U.S. District Court Judge Gary Feess' Christmas Eve preliminary ruling that Fox has a right to distribute the Zack Snyder adaptation of the popular graphic novel. Feess found that producer Lawrence Gordon failed to acquire Fox's entire interest in "Watchmen" after the studio abandoned the project a decade ago.

The studios are now battling over the key issue of whether that decision allows Fox to stop the film's release or whether the parties should proceed to a trial over monetary damages.

The studios laid out their arguments in papers filed this week. Warners cites a precedent-setting decision involving eBay that says a plaintiff in a copyright-infringement case must, among other things, prove that it will be irreparably harmed without an injunction and that money damages will not be an adequate remedy.

In fact, Warners claims, the opposite is true in this case. While Fox had "abandoned" the "Watchmen" property, Warners claims it has spent more than $150 million to make and market the film in a "carefully choreographed" plan to pique moviegoer interest March 6. Barring the release would do grave damage to Warners and third parties like exhibitors who are counting on the movie, the studio argues.

Fox claims that the eBay case does not apply in this instance and that Warners' infringement of its rights entitles it to stop the release.   Continued...