Update: Hayden Christensen Wins Big Victory Against USA in "Royal Pains" Appeal

[JamesG]

Hayden Christensen Sues USA Network
by Chris Jordan
posted Jul 7th 2010


File this one under: "Huh?"

According to the NY Post, actor Hayden Christensen and his brother filed a lawsuit against USA Network Tuesday claiming that "Royal Pains" was stolen from a pitch they made in 2005.




According to the suit, the brothers reportedly pitched a show about a "concierge'' doctor who makes house calls to the rich and famous, appropriately called "Housecall".

The reaction from USA? An executive told them that "prior to learning about "Housecall", he was unaware of concierge doctors and that he thought it was a fascinating idea,'' the brothers claim.






"Royal Pains" stars Mark Feuerstein as a young doctor wrongly blamed for a patient's death who makes a living treating wealthy clients in the Hamptons.

The series has been a ratings hit for USA, a subsidiary of NBC, drawing 7.8 million viewers for last year's season finale and 5.6 million for its season debut last month.



USA has yet to comment on the suit.

http://www.tvsquad.com/2010/07/07/ha...s-usa-network/

[JamesG]

Christensen Vows To Appeal TV Lawsuit Dismissal
5/11/11


Hayden Christensen has vowed to launch an appeal after a judge dismissed his lawsuit against the TV bosses he accused of stealing his idea for a comedy series.

The Canadian actor and his brother, Tove, filed suit against executives at the USA Network over allegations one of the channel's shows is based on an idea the brothers pitched to them back in 2005.

They claim their proposal for a show called Housecall, about a "concierge" doctor who makes home visits to rich and famous clients, was turned into "Royal Pains", starring Mark Feuerstein.






The case went to court in New York on Tuesday and Manhattan federal Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the lawsuit, ruling the claims concerned "materials that are not copyrightable, such as ideas."

Their lawyer, David Marek, has now confirmed the brothers will appeal the decision, telling the New York Post, "We are disappointed with the ruling and hope to have it reversed on appeal."

-IMDB News

[JamesG]

Hayden Christensen Wins Big Victory Against USA Network in "Royal Pains" Appeal
6/27/2012
by Eriq Gardner


Hayden Christensen has scored a major success at the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals.

A decision by the appellate circuit on Tuesday revives his claims against USA Television Network for allegedly stealing his concept to create the "Royal Pains" TV show and represents a significant setback for Hollywood studios at large in contending with idea theft lawsuits.







In 2005, Forest Park, the production company operated by Hayden Christensen, best known for his role as Anakin Skywalker in the Star Wars prequels, along with his brother Rove Christensen, formulated a concept for a TV show called "Housecall", in which a doctor, after being expelled from the medical community for treating patients who couldn't pay, moves to Malibu and attends to the rich and famous.

Forest Park created a written series treatment for the idea, including character bios, themes and storylines, and sent it to Alex Sepiol, a programming executive at USA Network. The Christensens then had meetings with Sepiol, who later testified he had never heard of doctor who makes house calls to the rich and famous before hearing the pitch.

However, the meetings never amounted to much.







Then, in 2009, USA introduced "Royal Pains", a show with a similar concept, which caused the Christensens to sue. Most importantly, the Christensens didn't allege copyright infringement, but rather a red hot claim known as breach of implied contract.

Under such a claim, when an idea is submitted and accepted for review, as the Christensens asserted here, there's an expectation that if the material is later used, the writer will get something.

It's a cause of action that has troubled many entertainment studios accustomed to successfully defending copyright infringement lawsuits. Plaintiffs fail in such cases because ideas are not protected by copyright; only substantially similar expression gets legal cover.

In fighting implied contract claims, studios have argued that state-based contract allegations are preempted by federal copyright law.







Last year, NBCU suffered a big loss in a similar case concerning SyFy's "Ghost Hunters" when the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected that theory. The case was significant enough that when it was appealed up to the U.S. Supreme Court, the MPAA and others in the industry submitted an amicus brief. The Supreme Court denied a review.

Since the loss, Hollywood studios and their lawyers have consoled themselves by figuring that it was just one appellate circuit and that there were others out there with the opposite conclusion.

But now Darth Vader has come along.







Last year, a federal judge dismissed Christensen's lawsuit against USA Network, agreeing with the network that copyright law preempted the implied breach of contract claim and that since his allegations entailed the theft of unprotectable ideas, the lawsuit had no merit.

On Tuesday, 2nd Circuit judge John Walker, Jr. wrote an opinion that reversed this judgment and held that Christensens' claims were not preempted by copyright law.

"There are several qualitative differences between such a contract claim and a copyright violation claim," he writes, adding that sister appellate circuits have recently come around to this same conclusion.

The judge says that a plaintiff can't avoid preemption simply by labeling a claim "breach of contract," but must actually allege elements of an enforceable contract, "including offer, acceptance, and consideration, in addition to adequately alleging the defendant’s breach of the contract."







To survive preemption, plaintiffs like Christensen have to bring proof of an "extra element" such as mutual assent or a promise to pay for use of a submitted idea.

Other circuits have interpreted the "extra element" standard in varying ways and here, Judge Walker notes that "in this case, we need not address whether preemption is precluded whenever there is a contract claim, or only when the contract claim includes a promise to pay."

But Judge Walker sees that the Christensens are alleging that when USA Network took the pitch meeting, it voluntarily accepted their ideas "knowing full well that Plaintiffs had submitted those ideas in confidence and for economic gain, and with the clear expectation of payment in the event those ideas were utilized by USA Network."

As such, he writes that this is qualitatively different than any copyright allegation and has thus decided to reverse the lower court judge's decision and remand the case back to the district court for further proceedings.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/liv...fillion-342567