Lucasfilm wins suit over SDS

Cenobyte

Sr Member
Lucasfilm Ltd. Wins Copyright Infringement Case in British High Court

Maker of Bootleg Star Wars Stormtrooper Costumes Found Liable for Damages





Last update: 10:20 a.m. EDT July 31, 2008







Image.aspx

LONDON, Jul 31, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- A High Court judge here today found that British firm Shepperton Design Studios and its principal, Andrew Ainsworth, violated the U.S. copyrights of Lucasfilm Ltd. by making and selling pirated Star Wars Stormtrooper helmets and other costume replicas.
Today's ruling by Mr Justice Mann in the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, affirmed that Lucasfilm is the sole owner of all rights to the iconic costume designs.
The court held that Ainsworth infringed Lucasfilm's rights when he reproduced the Stormtrooper helmet replicas and sold them under a false claim that he had created the designs, which were used in 1977's Star Wars: Episode IV A New Hope. Ainsworth was a plastics manufacturer who was hired in 1976 to reproduce designs created by a team of Lucasfilm artists, including costume designer John Mollo, who won an Academy Award for his work on the film.
The court found that the factual claims made by Ainsworth and his company were neither accurate nor reliable, and rejected his counterclaims seeking a share of the profits from the films.
Lucasfilm brought the case to the British High Court following a 2006 judgment by a California court awarding Lucasfilm $20 million in damages resulting from Ainsworth's activities. The British court held that it could apply U.S. law to the matter and ruled in Lucasfilm's favor on the merits of the infringement case.
The court also held that Ainsworth infringed Lucasfilm's rights under UK copyright laws, but that a UK-specific law that limits the enforcement of copyrights in industrial designs applied to the facts in the case. Lucasfilm is considering whether to appeal the legal finding under the UK industrial design law.
"We are grateful to the court for its ruling, which makes it clear that Lucasfilm and George Lucas are the rightful owners of the copyrights related to Star Wars," said Lucasfilm Vice President Howard Roffman.
"We do not intend to use this ruling to discourage our fans from expressing their imagination, creativity and passion for Star Wars through the costumes and props they make for their personal use," Roffman said. "Rather, we see the Court's decision as reaffirming that those who seek to illegally profit from Star Wars will be brought to task, wherever they may be."
Proceedings in the High Court of Justice began on April 8. The trial included testimony from Mollo; Gary Kurtz, producer of Star Wars: Episode IV A New Hope and Star Wars: Episode V The Empire Strikes Back; and Roffman, among others. Lucasfilm presented as evidence scores of sketches, designs, drawings and plans from the production of the first Star Wars film, which was produced in England in 1976. Original Imperial Stormtrooper costumes were displayed for the court as evidence. The trial now moves into the remedies phase, in which the court will determine the appropriate relief to provide to Lucasfilm.
Lucasfilm Ltd. is a privately held, fully integrated entertainment company based in San Francisco, Calif.
Lucasfilm Ltd., the Lucasfilm logo, Star Wars and related properties are trademarks and/or copyrights, in the United States and other countries, of Lucasfilm Ltd. and/or its affiliates. TM & (C) Lucasfilm Ltd. All rights reserved. All other trademarks and trade names are properties of their respective owners.
SOURCE: Lucasfilm Ltd.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"We do not intend to use this ruling to discourage our fans from expressing their imagination, creativity and passion for Star Wars through the costumes and props they make for their personal use," Roffman said. "Rather, we see the Court's decision as reaffirming that those who seek to illegally profit from Star Wars will be brought to task, wherever they may be."

I don't think thats too restrictive.
 
Not a good day for prop and costume makers. I guess anyone can be attacked now. :(

Yes, anyone can be held accountable for illegal activity, that has always been the case... It's hardly doomsday...

As I said in the other thread...

Claiming to own the rights, pulling ads in magazines, putting ads up on other sites, having a full blown website and having full blown booths at conventions promoting your goods is a whole different story then selling it online by the murmur of the wind...

All you have to do is look at GF's Armor FX/GT suits they continue to flow out the door for the most part uninterrupted for years upon years...

LFL has a pretty good record of only knocking down those who cross the boarder to full scale marketing, not the fans...
 
"We do not intend to use this ruling to discourage our fans from expressing their imagination, creativity and passion for Star Wars through the costumes and props they make for their personal use," Roffman said.

"Rather, we see the Court's decision as reaffirming that those who seek to illegally profit from Star Wars will be brought to task, wherever they may be."


I think this is a good statement.
 
The court held that Ainsworth infringed Lucasfilm's rights when he reproduced the Stormtrooper helmet replicas and sold them under a false claim that he had created the designs,

Ok, so how does that go for all the customers that were sold those props under false pretenses? I mean now your "screen accurate" suit from the "original moulds" is worth no more than an FX. Possibly less due to bad press.

P.s. - the SDS site is still up and it looks as tho they're still offering helmets....
 
Last edited:
Its strange how strict Lucasfilm can be about certain things but not others... they come down hard on guys like these, but let a lot of other things go unnoticed (not choosing a side here, just an observation). You look at companies like DC Comics - they let NOTHING go by unlicensed, even the smallest, custom made items. I've heard the same thing about Disney, but have not witnessed it first hand. Then theres Lucasfilm - literally hundreds upon thousands of custom lightsabers, costumes, whatever are being sold on a daily basis, and go untouched. Maybe its just the sheer amount thats out there, and instead of trying to beat down on every one, just make an example of the better known guys...?
 
"The justice system moves much more quickly, now that they have abolished all lawyers"
-- Doc Brown vs. BOE --
 
well LFL seem to be smart enough to know if you lay the smackdown on everyone you end up with some really bad press. Like the MPAA suing Kids for downloads. They know that if people see stuff from star wars they'll think "huh, I liked that. I'll watch/buy the movie and some merchandise. There's a reason LFL movies have such a massive fanbase compared to the 1 hit for every 3 flops that DC have.
 
Ok, so how does that go for all the customers that were sold those props under false pretenses? I mean now your "screen accurate" suit from the "original moulds" is worth no more than an FX. Possibly less due to bad press.

Very good point..........

also the damages owed how will this work out, i mean will AA physically have to pay LFL the money back i heard it was something like 20 million.

will AA then turn to the people who were involved with him to help share the payment of these damages he owes.
 
Its strange how strict Lucasfilm can be about certain things but not others... they come down hard on guys like these, but let a lot of other things go unnoticed (not choosing a side here, just an observation). You look at companies like DC Comics - they let NOTHING go by unlicensed, even the smallest, custom made items. I've heard the same thing about Disney, but have not witnessed it first hand. Then theres Lucasfilm - literally hundreds upon thousands of custom lightsabers, costumes, whatever are being sold on a daily basis, and go untouched. Maybe its just the sheer amount thats out there, and instead of trying to beat down on every one, just make an example of the better known guys...?

I think he was made an example of for basically snubbing his nose at LFL after being C&D'd after repeated attempts by LFL to ask him to stop.

Then as stated before, the magazine ads, the booths claiming ownership etc...
 
Ok, so how does that go for all the customers that were sold those props under false pretenses?

That is an issue between the customer and AA/SDS, you will be required to sue him if you feel cheated...

will AA then turn to the people who were involved with him to help share the payment of these damages he owes.

AA has failed to list any other responsible partners in his venture, so the judgment will fall entirely on him and his corporation which I believe his wife is the only additional partner to...

also the damages owed how will this work out, i mean will AA physically have to pay LFL the money back i heard it was something like 20 million.

Read the ruling the Judge pretty much points out the LFL isn't out to squish him like a bug, but they will hold a monetary judgment over his head, and if he doesn't get a clue and see the light, they will use it to forcably remind him...
 
"We do not intend to use this ruling to discourage our fans from expressing their imagination, creativity and passion for Star Wars through the costumes and props they make for their personal use," Roffman said.

"Rather, we see the Court's decision as reaffirming that those who seek to illegally profit from Star Wars will be brought to task, wherever they may be."

I don't see that this as anything new or different from LFL. As far as I know, they have never (with the possible exception of GF a few years ago) simply hit someone with a lawsuit out of the blue. They don't seem to go searching for people, for the most part they just let us get on with it.

Like has been said, if people start taking out magazine ads, promoting the product...they have every reason to do something. I'm assuming they first hit SDS with a C&D, which he presumably ignored. If you ignore that, then you should expect to be sued.

I sure did, which is why I did NOT ignore the one I got...
 
As far as I know, they have never (with the possible exception of GF a few years ago) simply hit someone with a lawsuit out of the blue.

And that one wasn't even out of the blue, either. GF ignored C&Ds.
 
Ok, so how does that go for all the customers that were sold those props under false pretenses? I mean now your "screen accurate" suit from the "original moulds" is worth no more than an FX. Possibly less due to bad press.

Well, I hate to say it because I'd like the debate to be over forever, but the ruling does not seem to address whether the original molds claim is true. It seems not to have been relevant. The issue was whether he could sell the things, original molds or no.

As for value, since he can't sell any more, maybe it'll go UP. I guess we'll see how the collector's market reacts.
 
As for value, since he can't sell any more, maybe it'll go UP. I guess we'll see how the collector's market reacts.

I have a feeling the fact that SDS are now the most 'infamous' and definitely the most talked about helmets ever they may rise in value in time.

Possibly the less fashionable helmets that came out later after the troopers and TIE would have been less saught after and possibly made in pretty low numbers so may become more collectible in years to come.

Chris
 
Back
Top