Apple & M. Night Shyamalan sued, accused of plagiarizing 'Servant'

AppleInsider

A lawsuit filed on Wednesday accuses Apple and filmmaker M. Night Shyamalan of directly copying much of 2013 film "The Truth About Emanuel" in the production of "Servant."

The lawsuit, filed in the Central District of California, Western Division, by Francesca Gregorini, discusses in detail the similarities in tone, plot, and style between Apple TV+ feature "Servant" and 2013 production of "The Truth About Emanuel." Both productions involve a "reborn" doll being attended by a hired nanny, with similar themes and film-making techniques alleged throughout.

"[The] plot description of 'Emanuel' could just as easily be applied to 'Servant,' made six years later. And that's just the beginning of the commonalities between the two works," alleges the filing. "These similarities include not just parallel plot points, but also strikingly similar-- and highly idiosyncratic-- characters, scenes, directorial choices, and modes of storytelling."

Gregorini claims that not just the core of the story was lifted wholesale -- but also other elements including grief, and emotional attachment after loss.

As in Emanuel, a central theme of Servant involves the extraordinary and almost irrational reciprocal devotion between mother and nanny. In both works, the mother's adoration of the nanny stems from her grief and denial over losing a child. She delusionally channels her maternal instincts towards a doll-- but also more genuinely directs them to the real-life vulnerable surrogate-daughter caring for her 'baby.' In both works, the nanny's strong feelings for her employer stem from longings for a lost mother, which she finds being fulfilled by a new mother figure in dire need of a child.

The lawsuit filing says that Apple refers inquiries about the production to Shyamalan's lawyer. When Shyamalan's lawyer was contacted by the plaintiff's attorneys, the response was allegedly that they cannot speak for Apple. Furthermore, unspecified defendants reportedly say that "Servant" was in some form of development long before the production of "The Truth About Emanuel."

The suit is not limited to Apple and Shyamalan. Also listed are four other production companies, five members of the production staff, and 10 "John Does" presumably other personnel involved in the production of "Servant."

Shyamalan has been accused of plagiarism before. In 2003 screenwriter Robert McIlhinney alleged that "Signs" had similarities to unpublished script "Lord of the Barrens: The Jersey Devil." The following year, Margaret Peterson Haddix discussed suing Shyamalan with publisher Simon & Schuster over similarities between "The Village" and "Running out of Time," a novel from 1996. Author Orson Scott Card has also claimed that parts of "The Sixth Sense" were taken from novel "Lost Boys" -- but he never sued.

Gregorini is demanding all damages, an injunction against further production, a recall of any inventory of the infringing material, supervised destruction of any inventory, disgorgement of all proceeds, and punitive damages.

Francesca Gregorini vs Apple and M. Night Shyamalan by Mike Wuerthele on Scribd

EsquireCats

Ah did they even watch servant? The plots significantly differ from the very first episode. I.E the baby. 

mark fearing

Very difficult cases to prove. Most likely it will be dismissed. You'd need an overwhelming beat-for-beat match. And prove that the writers and producers saw or had the other material in their possession. Did they see the movie? Read the script? You'd need proof. I had never heard of the film, which doesn't mean it was bad nor that it wasn't copied, but it will be a tough case.

kumamon

I remember the plot of 6th Sense was very similar to a story in one of the “Tales from the Crypt” comic books I read almost 30 years ago.  15 mins into the movie, I already suspected Bruce’s character was dead, just like I had read in that comic book all those years ago.

crowley

I've seen the The Truth About Emanuel, and the premise of Servant does sound exactly the same.  It seems to me like the writer is the one who should be sued though.

entropys

kumamon said:

I remember the plot of 6th Sense was very similar to a story in one of the “Tales from the Crypt” comic books I read almost 30 years ago.  15 mins into the movie, I already suspected Bruce’s character was dead, just like I had read in that comic book all those years ago.

Bugger, I was going to finally watch that on the weekend. Now you rooned it.

lkrupp

mark fearing said:

Very difficult cases to prove. Most likely it will be dismissed. You'd need an overwhelming beat-for-beat match. And prove that the writers and producers saw or had the other material in their possession. Did they see the movie? Read the script? You'd need proof. I had never heard of the film, which doesn't mean it was bad nor that it wasn't copied, but it will be a tough case.

But it has Apple's name on it and lawyers love deep pocketed defendants.

spice-boy

lkrupp said:

mark fearing said:

Very difficult cases to prove. Most likely it will be dismissed. You'd need an overwhelming beat-for-beat match. And prove that the writers and producers saw or had the other material in their possession. Did they see the movie? Read the script? You'd need proof. I had never heard of the film, which doesn't mean it was bad nor that it wasn't copied, but it will be a tough case.

But it has Apple's name on it and lawyers love deep pocketed defendants.

Who would sue a poor person or company with no money? Apple is responsible for all of it's products including content on Apple TV+. We have all seen during movie or tv credits "based on a story by xxxx xxxxx". The person get's paid for creating that story. Apple should pay up for their mistake. 

randominternetperson

kumamon said:

I remember the plot of 6th Sense was very similar to a story in one of the “Tales from the Crypt” comic books I read almost 30 years ago.  15 mins into the movie, I already suspected Bruce’s character was dead, just like I had read in that comic book all those years ago.

In the article they mention Orson Scott Card complaining that the 6th Sense copied from The Lost Boys.  I read that book many years ago (and enjoyed it), but the plot isn't remotely similar to the 6th Sense.  There is no way that he would have won in court against MNS.  But that was comparing a book to a movie.  This current suit is a movie versus a movie.  Perhaps he's got a stronger case.

lkrupp

spice-boy said:

lkrupp said:

mark fearing said:

Very difficult cases to prove. Most likely it will be dismissed. You'd need an overwhelming beat-for-beat match. And prove that the writers and producers saw or had the other material in their possession. Did they see the movie? Read the script? You'd need proof. I had never heard of the film, which doesn't mean it was bad nor that it wasn't copied, but it will be a tough case.

But it has Apple's name on it and lawyers love deep pocketed defendants.

Who would sue a poor person or company with no money? Apple is responsible for all of it's products including content on Apple TV+. We have all seen during movie or tv credits "based on a story by xxxx xxxxx". The person get's paid for creating that story. Apple should pay up for their mistake. 

And what "mistake" should Apple pay up for, exactly? Sounds like you have already convicted Apple and Shyamalan without even looking at the evidence. I'd hate to see you on a jury, that's for sure. 

kumamon

randominternetperson said:

kumamon said:

I remember the plot of 6th Sense was very similar to a story in one of the “Tales from the Crypt” comic books I read almost 30 years ago.  15 mins into the movie, I already suspected Bruce’s character was dead, just like I had read in that comic book all those years ago.

In the article they mention Orson Scott Card complaining that the 6th Sense copied from The Lost Boys.  I read that book many years ago (and enjoyed it), but the plot isn't remotely similar to the 6th Sense.  There is no way that he would have won in court against MNS.  But that was comparing a book to a movie.  This current suit is a movie versus a movie.  Perhaps he's got a stronger case.

Never saw the Lost Boys so cannot comment but 6th sense was way too similar about a man who didn't know he was dead and found out later through the course of the story.  Movie or not, stories are not always entirely original.  Some may even have been borrowed through the passage of time.

spice-boy

lkrupp said:

spice-boy said:

lkrupp said:

mark fearing said:

Very difficult cases to prove. Most likely it will be dismissed. You'd need an overwhelming beat-for-beat match. And prove that the writers and producers saw or had the other material in their possession. Did they see the movie? Read the script? You'd need proof. I had never heard of the film, which doesn't mean it was bad nor that it wasn't copied, but it will be a tough case.

But it has Apple's name on it and lawyers love deep pocketed defendants.

Who would sue a poor person or company with no money? Apple is responsible for all of it's products including content on Apple TV+. We have all seen during movie or tv credits "based on a story by xxxx xxxxx". The person get's paid for creating that story. Apple should pay up for their mistake. 

And what "mistake" should Apple pay up for, exactly? Sounds like you have already convicted Apple and Shyamalan without even looking at the evidence. I'd hate to see you on a jury, that's for sure. 

Apple is now responsible for content the way major studios are, they should "man up" stop whining when they get caught promoting plagiarized material. This is not a case of a patent troll who says they invented a drop down menu. Welcome to show biz Apple. 

MacPro

I once read there are only seven stories, everything else is derivative.