Dan Ackerman, author of the 2016 book The Tetris Effect and editor-in-chief at Gizmodo, has sued Apple, the Tetris Company and other related parties for allegedly ripping off his book for the 2023 live action Apple TV Tetris movie. Ackerman claims that the parties involved in making the film copied “the exact same feel, tone, approach, and scenes” from his book; adding that the film "liberally borrowed numerous specific sections and events of the book" and was "similar in almost all material respects" to it.

The lawsuit mentions that the Tetris Company was provided a pre-publication copy of Ackerman's book and subsequently dissuaded the author from adapting projects for his book.

Ackerman is asking for money damages equaling at least 6% of the film's $80 million production budget.

SOURCE 1, SOURCE 2

 

[Reploid]

Looks like someone wants free money again

 

[tech3475]

It will be interesting to hear Leonard French’s (a Copyright attorney on Youtube) take on this.

NAL but I can imagine it causing problems for their case if the alleged scenes were based on real life events, but then according to the Wikipedia article there were the typical for a biopic fictionalised scenes.

 

[Veho]

Well now, if they lifted "specific sections and events" from the book he has an open and shut case, because none of the events in the book/movie happened in real life.

 

[Bladexdsl]

CRAPple stealing other peoples material yeah so whats new?

 

[FAST6191]

Gizmodo vs Apple. Whoever loses we all win.

Anyway will await some more in depth analysis and comparison as what I have seen of this in the past is actually quite hard to make a case for. Spy thriller as a unique framing device for a business film is a stretch though from where I sit as it is one of the bigger choices for it historically, with what I know of the story of Tetris making it even more apt for it (who had rights, last minute deals, multiple people competing... plus the whole cold war thing).

and have not watched the tetris so will go with my usual suggestion in these scenarios

 

[Urbanshadow]

I only see it as a free publicity stunt by this book author.

Why the stress to assure legal claims were tried to be fired before the movie released? Why the need to look good to the public if only looking for his "legal" fair share of copyright claims?

Nah, this John Doe wanted to reach the news and here we are. I wish him luck defending a movie "feels" close like his book enough to claim copy rights.

 

[eyeliner]

I only see it as a free publicity stunt by this book author.

Why the stress to assure legal claims were tried to be fired before the movie released? Why the need to look good to the public if only looking for his "legal" fair share of copyright claims?

Nah, this John Doe wanted to reach the news and here we are. I wish him luck defending a movie "feels" close like his book enough to claim copy rights.

Or, you know... He's maybe right?
I'd say a barely smart person wouldn't go against Apple with a weak case. It's widely known that media, mostly moving pictures, take a lot of inspiration from other mediums.

But I'd wager the dude will want money and some mention in the credits section. And will settle out of court. As mostly these things end up.

 

[impeeza]

If you were a book of historic events and some body do a picture of the same historic events, did he ripoff your book because the historic events are the same on both?

 

[Metoroid0]

Looks like someone wants free money again

i dont see how its free if its his ip. (if it is)

 

[Veho]

If you were a book of historic events and some body do a picture of the same historic events, did he ripoff your book because the historic events are the same on both?

But that doesn't matter since it's not a book of historic events.

 

[Noctosphere]

i dont see how its free if its his ip. (if it is)

Tetris effect is a syndrome, that's it. Unless he talks about something else in that book?

 

[HarveyHouston]

...Does it really matter? So somebody didn't compensate you for a copy of your work. Haters gonna hate.

 

[gohan123]

the battle of tetris continues ...

 

[osaka35]

Fascinating. It'll be easy enough to prove if the fictional scenes from the movie are too similar/exact same as the scenes from the book. Well, "easy". Even if he has a rock-solid case, if you throw enough money and lawyers at an issue it tends to go away. Fingers crossed this person gets what they're owed, whatever that is.

 

[Phearoz]

Gizmodo vs Apple. Whoever loses we all win.

Anyway will await some more in depth analysis and comparison as what I have seen of this in the past is actually quite hard to make a case for. Spy thriller as a unique framing device for a business film is a stretch though from where I sit as it is one of the bigger choices for it historically, with what I know of the story of Tetris making it even more apt for it (who had rights, last minute deals, multiple people competing... plus the whole cold war thing).

and have not watched the tetris so will go with my usual suggestion in these scenarios

That video makes me want to roblox myself

 

[AamitMorthos]

I mean, I hate apple as much as the guy beside me but uhhhhhh good luck with that

 

[Julie_Pilgrim]

...Does it really matter? So somebody didn't compensate you for a copy of your work. Haters gonna hate.

well i wouldn't say that. it sucks when people make money off something you made. not really a "haters gonna hate" situation yknow

 

[Urbanshadow]

Or, you know... He's maybe right?
I'd say a barely smart person wouldn't go against Apple with a weak case. It's widely known that media, mostly moving pictures, take a lot of inspiration from other mediums.

But I'd wager the dude will want money and some mention in the credits section. And will settle out of court. As mostly these things end up.

A pile of money and recognition is always a nice to have out of a legal process but you don't need to desperately look for public approval while you're at it, right? It's not the public approval you need but actually some grounds on the claim your making.

Also you arose a nice point which is only pointing even harder at this being a publicity stunt. One just does not sue apple and expect to win. Doesn't matter how good your attorney is, dollar driven suits are stronger in court.

I think this guy is just expecting people who watched the movie to buy his book to judge by themselves if its a copy or not. Make the quick buck, go through a somewhat rational legal settlement with apple without arriving to court and calling it a day.

I don't think it's about being right anymore. Just pure greed by all parts.

 

[smf]

Plagarism cases are hard, but he only needs to convince the jury that they are 51% sure that the book he alleges to have sent them and tried to get them to agree to license into a film, was similar to the film they made.

Both the book and the film are mostly fiction.

In a 2023 interview, Alexey Pajitnov admitted that the film "didn't make an actual biography or an actual recreation of what actually happened", but that was "close enough and very right emotionally and spiritually"

In reality there were a load of meetings, everything went smoothly, he flew home & made loads of money. The previous licensees got shafted.