Gizmodo author sues Apple over 'Tetris' movie

AppleInsider

Author Dan Ackerman claims that Apple, The Tetris Company, and others adapted his book about the famous puzzle game for their film without permission or payment.

Taron Egerton in "Tetris" (Source: Apple)

"Tetris" was acquired by Apple TV+ in 2020, following years in the 2010s of failed attempts to get it into production as a reportedly edgy film. Apple's securing the rights is likely to have given the production sufficient funds to proceed.

As a drama-documentary written by Noah Pink, "Tetris" finally premiered at the South by Southwest festival in March 2023, before streaming on Apple TV+ at the end of that month.

Subscribe to AppleInsider on YouTube

According to Reuters, however, Gizmodo editor in chief Dan Ackerman is alleging that the film is based on his book, "The Tetris Effect." Following its publication in 2016, Ackerman says he sent the book to The Tetris Company, which allegedly then copied it.

More, Ackerman says that The Tetris Company threatened to sue him if he were to pursue film or television rights for his book himself. Specifically, the company denied him permission to use Tetris intellectual property and sent him a "strongly worded cease and desist letter," according to Reuters.

"[This lawsuit] aims to right a wrong," said Ackerman's attorney Kevin Landau, "and provide the respect and justice to the work, diligence and ownership of someone who is entitled to such respect and acknowledgment under the law."

Ackerman is asking the court for damages equally at least 6% of the film's $80 million budget.

Neither Apple nor The Tetris Company have commented.

Read on AppleInsider

mikethemartian

I want a movie about Atari Adventure.

chasm

Something here doesn’t add up. The filmmakers were trying to get this film made in the 2010s, Mr. Ackerman didn’t even publish his book until 2016, so the Tetris Company couldn’t have stolen it before that point, so … what material were the filmmakers using to peddle the project prior to 2016?

Also, it doesn’t sound like Apple (though undoubtedly named in the suit) actually has anything to do with this. From Mr. Ackerman’s own accusations, his lawsuit is against the Tetris Company for stealing his book and then using that stolen property to sell the film rights. Also … how do you not notice your book has been stolen until months after the finished film has come out? Wouldn’t you have noticed that the film rights were sold in 2020?

I’m not doubting Mr. Ackerman’s view on the matter, but much of this doesn’t make sense yet. Hopefully any court case (or settlement) will answer these and other questions about how this (allegedly) happened.

cpsro

Can history be copyrighted?

irnchriz

As this is a true story, are there any fictional parts of his book that are in the movie? Otherwise how could he tell they copied it if it were based on actual events?

chasm

cpsro said:

Can history be copyrighted?

Your written take on it can, absolutely.

filemakerfeller

chasm said:

Something here doesn’t add up. The filmmakers were trying to get this film made in the 2010s, Mr. Ackerman didn’t even publish his book until 2016, so the Tetris Company couldn’t have stolen it before that point, so … what material were the filmmakers using to peddle the project prior to 2016?

Also, it doesn’t sound like Apple (though undoubtedly named in the suit) actually has anything to do with this. From Mr. Ackerman’s own accusations, his lawsuit is against the Tetris Company for stealing his book and then using that stolen property to sell the film rights. Also … how do you not notice your book has been stolen until months after the finished film has come out? Wouldn’t you have noticed that the film rights were sold in 2020?

I’m not doubting Mr. Ackerman’s view on the matter, but much of this doesn’t make sense yet. Hopefully any court case (or settlement) will answer these and other questions about how this (allegedly) happened.

But the film didn't get made until after the book was published. Was it a matter of producers not feeling there was market demand until they saw the book sales? Or was the proposed movie not compelling enough until items identified by the author of the book were written into the screenplay?

Hopefully more details will come to light.

dav

mikethemartian said:

I want a movie about Atari Adventure.

Starring, The Rock.

sflagel

cpsro said:

Can history be copyrighted?

Arguably, it should be. Historic accounts always only show one narrative of history, so that particular narrative should be copyrighted. It takes effort to piece together individual bits of information and data into one coherent historic narrative - the documented result of doing so should be protected. (Witness the painstakingly long and contentious process of establishing the timeline and events of only a few hours during January 6th).

petri

Ackerman may or may not have a case depending on whether there were fictionalised elements in the book that made it into the film - but it’s worth remembering that “the Tetris company” he’s suing is the legal entity set up by two key characters - Tetris’s inventor and distributor - ie the people whose story is told in the film.  So for him to effectively sue those individuals for telling their own story in their own film is.. interesting.  Trying to claim prior ownership of their own lives is a pretty bold legal move.

edited August 2023

foregoneconclusion

Why would a movie about Tetris need an $80 million budget? 

get serious

Apparently a person at Gizmodo doesn't like it when someone steals their prototype and uses it to write a story.
How times have changed.

charlesatlas

sflagel said:

cpsro said:

Can history be copyrighted?

Arguably, it should be. Historic accounts always only show one narrative of history, so that particular narrative should be copyrighted. It takes effort to piece together individual bits of information and data into one coherent historic narrative - the documented result of doing so should be protected. (Witness the painstakingly long and contentious process of establishing the timeline and events of only a few hours during January 6th).

 The expression of an idea can be copyrighted. The idea cannot. Facts cannot. How could you allow anyone to copyright the fact that the insurrection happened? Would nobody else be able to make that statement then?

charlesatlas

chasm said:

Something here doesn’t add up. The filmmakers were trying to get this film made in the 2010s, Mr. Ackerman didn’t even publish his book until 2016, so the Tetris Company couldn’t have stolen it before that point, so … what material were the filmmakers using to peddle the project prior to 2016?

It says "in the 2010s," which doesn't indicate the entire decade. Just like saying, "The Apple II hit the market in the 1970s" doesn't mean it was around before 1977.