Jury Rules in Favor of Disney in Moana Copyright Case
In a swift decision, a jury in Los Angeles has dismissed allegations that Disney’s animated film “Moana” was derived from a writer’s earlier project. The case revolved around claims made by Buck Woodall, who argued that Disney had accessed his story of “Bucky the Surfer Boy,” which he outlined in various drafts over the years.
Deliberation and Verdict
After approximately two and a half hours of deliberation, the jury concluded that there was no basis for Woodall’s claims. They found that the creators of “Moana” had no access to his scripts or outlines, thus eliminating the necessity to evaluate the similarities between “Bucky” and Disney’s award-winning film.
Access and Sharing of Material
Woodall had shared his work with a distant relative, Jenny Marchick, who was employed by Mandeville Films—a company located on the Disney lot. Marchick testified that although she received Woodall’s materials, she never shared them with Disney representatives.
Following the verdict, Woodall’s attorney, Gustavo Lage, expressed disappointment and indicated the legal team would consider their next steps.
Arguments from Both Sides
During the trial, Woodall’s attorney presented a narrative suggesting a connection between “Bucky” and “Moana.” Lage emphasized that the two works were closely related and that “There was no ‘Moana’ without ‘Bucky.’”
On the other hand, Disney’s defense lawyer, Moez Kaba, stressed that the film was an original creation resulting from the extensive experience of its directors, John Musker and Ron Clements. Kaba stated that the creators had no knowledge of Woodall’s story, asserting, “They had never seen it, never heard of it.”
Financial Implications and Legal Proceedings
“Moana,” released in 2016, grossed nearly $700 million globally. However, a prior court ruling determined that Woodall’s initial lawsuit, filed in 2020, was untimely and precluded him from claiming a share of the film’s profits. A subsequent lawsuit regarding a proposed “Moana 2” remains active, although indications suggest it could face similar challenges given the current verdict.
Judge Consuelo B. Marshall, who presided over the case, expressed agreement with the jury’s finding concerning access to Woodall’s materials during her comments following the verdict.
Understanding the Works
The jury, comprised of six women and two men, was presented with “Moana” in full, alongside Woodall’s earlier outlines and notes from 2003, 2008, and 2011. The latter iterations of “Bucky” involved a young character on a quest in Hawaii, communicating with Native Hawaiian youths and interacting with demigods in a race to protect sacred lands from developers.
While Woodall pointed to overlapping themes—involving oceanic adventures and Polynesian mythology—Kaba countered by stressing that many of these elements are common tropes within the cultural realm and not exclusive to either work. He noted that these motifs, such as shape-shifting and mystical animal guides, have long existed in literature and cinema, with references dating back to early Disney classics.
Conclusion
In the aftermath of the verdict, Disney expressed satisfaction with the jury’s decision, highlighting the collaborative effort that went into creating “Moana.” The studio reiterated the originality of the film and looked forward to continuing its legacy of storytelling.
As Woodall contemplates his options, the outcome reflects the complexities of copyright law, particularly in an industry that thrives on shared cultural narratives.
