“MacGyver” Creator Wants To Stop “MacGruber”
The creator of “MacGyver” is not very happy with the upcoming big-screen parody “MacGruber” according to the Hollywood Reporter.
Lee Zlotoff, who created the TV series, has retained the right to make a movie based on the show via his “separated rights” under WGA rules.
The parody film, based on an “Saturday Night Live” skit, went into production last year and the film is set to open in April. But now Zlotoff has sent a cease-and-desist letter to the production of “MacGruber” that could put the opening date in jeopardy.
“We feel they’re infringing our rights,” Zlotoff lawyer Paul Mayersohn tells the Reporter. As the film’s April 23 release date approaches, Mayersohn says he’s meeting with litigators to determine a course of action, which might include filing a copyright and/or trademark lawsuit and attempting to get an injunction against the film’s release.
This case presents a potentially interesting twist on typical parody situations because the “MacGyver” and “MacGruber” films are being developed simultaneously and the parody will hit theaters before the original (and presumably could impact the market for a film based on the original). Mayersohn said an unfair competition claim could be part of a Zlotoff lawsuit, but a few of our litigator sources said he still faces an uphill battle on free speech grounds.
“There’s a broad right to parody, and in this instance it’s clearly parody,” said Alonzo Wickers, a First Amendment attorney with Davis Wright Tremaine in Los Angeles. “I don’t think a viewer will believe the ‘MacGyver’ folks authorized this.”
As to whether “MacGruber” infringes any “MacGyver” copyrights, Martin Katz, an entertainment litigator with Sheppard Mullin, says Zlotoff’s case could hinge on whether the “MacGruber” parody makes a “fair use” of the “MacGyver” rights — a loose test that courts employ to balance free speech against the rights of intellectual property owners.
“If he’s got separated rights and the right to make a motion picture is his, the out for that would be if the work falls within fair use,” Katz said.
Good! I think a movie of a one-note parody skit is not a good idea.
And, you misspelled MacGyver in the Title.
Hope he wins but it could be funny.
It’s the same as saying Austin Powers is a rippoff of the early Jame Bond movie.
Regardless of how bad this movie will be, parody is protected speech. Overly sensitive people tend to get overly litigious. Speaking of Austin Powers, that’s a perfect example. When “Goldmember” came out, the estate of Ian Fleming suddenly got all whiny about infringement (despite it’s predecessor “The Spy Who Shagged Me” being just as blatant a parody). If you become famous, prepare to be made fun of, it’s part of the deal.
This should fall under the parody exception of the intellectual property laws.
However, it will probably suck, as most movies derived from an SNL skit quickly find that a premise that is funny for five minutes wears really thin when stretched out to two hours. For every “Wayne’s World” to come out, there’s been two or three “It’s Pat” and “Stuart Saves His Family” movies.
You know how you know that It’s Pat was a bad movie? It’s STAR was happy to see it fail! *LOL*
While I can’t deny that MacGruber falls under parody protection, I still wish they weren’t making it. I don’t find it funny in three-minute skit form, so I can’t imagine it would be any more successful stretched to 90 minutes. But, hey, different strokes and all that.
I agree with the parody thing. However, I’m also thinking that since they didn’t complain about the skits playing on SNL, and they didn’t complain again when it was aired as a Pepsi commercial during the Superbowl, they don’t have much of a leg to stand on, either.