French Author Claims 'Finding Nemo' Plagiarism By Disney

PARIS (Hollywood Reporter) - A French children's author has sued Walt Disney Pictures and Pixar Animation Studios, claiming the cartoon fish they catapulted to fame in the worldwide blockbuster "Finding Nemo" was plagiarized from his 1995 creation Pierrot Le Poisson Clown.

Pascal Kamina, a copyrights lawyer representing the author, Franck Le Calvez, confirmed in a telephone interview Monday that the case -- claiming damages for breach of copyright and trademark and demanding that they withdraw "Nemo" books and merchandise from French shops -- will come up for hearing in a French court Feb. 17.

"We consider the case filed in France to be totally without merit because 'Finding Nemo,' which is owned by Pixar and Disney, was independently developed and does not infringe anyone's copyrights or trademarks," according to a statement that Disney released Monday.

Le Calvez, a 33-year-old aquarium buff, said in an interview Monday that he registered Pierrot as a trademark with France's industrial protection and copyrights body in 1995. An aspiring filmmaker, Le Calvez said he then did the rounds of French production companies and animation studios, hoping they would fall for the lovable tropical fish with white stripes and large orange bulging eyes. But he was turned down, and the little fish languished in a folder until 2000, when Le Calvez decided to make Pierrot the hero of an illustrated children's book.

Registering the screenplay with the French Society of Authors in June 2002, Le Calvez paid nearly $71,000 to publish 2,000 copies of the book in November 2002. Illustrated by Robin Delpuech and Thierry Jagodzinski, "Pierrot Le Poisson Clown" was published by France's Editions Flaven Scene, and the entire print run was sold in a month.

Agreeing that the uncanny resemblance between Pierrot and Nemo could be coincidental (clown fish, Amphiprion ocellaris, do look alike in nature), Le Calvez said he realized something was fishy only after French bookstore chain FNAC removed copies of his book from their shelves, claiming that it was too similar to Disney's version.

"What's really upsetting is that quite a few bookstores won't sell my book because they think that I have plagiarized 'Nemo,"' the author said in an interview Monday. "The two fish look very similar, but it doesn't end there."

Like Nemo, Pierrot lives in a pink sea anemone and starts life half-orphaned because one parent was swallowed up by Liona, the scorpion fish. "The beginning of the story is the same, even if the scenarios then become different," Le Calvez said.

Kamina, who admitted that the film was finished by the time Le Calvez's first book came out (a second has been written since), said he is worried that his client's success will be swallowed up by the American fish. He said the "Nemo" idea probably found its way to the United States through one of the French studios that Le Calvez approached in 1995.

"That would be the only explanation," he said. "It's not just the resemblance of the clown fish, smiling with a raised fin. We have also found the same supporting characters in the film -- such as a surgeon fish and cleaner shrimp -- and gentle fish folk who help the little troubled hero. The similarities are sufficiently troubling for us to ask for an explanation from Disney."

The lawyer said his client is still waiting for an answer from Disney and that if they don't hear from the company, Le Calvez will press ahead with his lawsuit in France.

Garfield was an offshoot of Snoopy, and Hobbes was also.

I have to disagree with that on a minor point. In the beginning, Garfield was strictly a quadruped. In an interview on KSFO with WND columnist Barbara Simpson, Jim Davis said that it was none other than Charles Schulz who convinced him to expand Garfield's horizons by having him walk upright like Snoopy does.

If you can, check out the very, very early Peanuts strips, when the main characters were Charlie Brown, Shermy, Patty (not Peppermint Patty) and Lucy (Linus and Schroeder were born into the strip later). Snoopy was strictly a dog, with no vivid imagination causing him to fantasize about being a World War I pilot or an astronaut.

As for Calvin & Hobbes: reading an interview with Bill Watterson is a maddening experience. He took the strip seriously, which is good, but he intellectualized the characters in his own mind to an extent that it makes you wonder if he is sane.

Watterston is a flake, but a very creative flake. I think some of the guys assume that I'm dissing the strip, but it was one of my favorites. Watterston took the names of the title characters from John Calvin and Thomas Hobbes, so you know he's going to be an intellectual. He also refused to allow any merchandising of the characters, except for the compiled books, which has cost him millions of dollars. He could have had Calvin and Hobbes dolls, children's books, statues, greeting cards, televison specials, stickers, etc. The "Calvin p*ssing" stickers you see on vehicles are bootlegs.

In Charlie Brown, Snoopy and Me, Shultz explained that Snoopy was based on a dog he'd owned as a child, as was the Charlie Brown character (Shultz's father was even a barber, like Charlie Brown's). He said Snoopy started out as a dog, but he slowly started reacting to the children around him, and just gradually grew into a major character. He also said he had to work hard to keep Snoopy from taking over the entire strip, especially after Woodstock came along to be a side kick that could interact with him more readily.

What I was saying was, that without Snoopy and Garfield, there would not have been a Hobbes. Certainly there were other influences. Winnie the Pooh, for example, was another character that existed as a toy in real life, but was alive in the eyes of his owner. Hobbes, though, traces his roots, I believe more directly through Snoopy. Prior to Snoopy, comic strip animals were pretty much, well, animals. Ruff was never anything but a dog. Dittoes for Barfy (Family Circus), Pluto (Mickey Mouse), Daisy (Dagwood and Blondie) and most other cartoon pets. They were primarily animals. After Snoopy, thinking animals appeared throughout comics. Garfield had an edge of sarcasm that Snoopy never had, and I think this edge influenced Watterston in the creation of Hobbes.

I used to teach cartooning classes (non-credit) at the University of Texas, so I've thought about this a lot more than is probably healthy. I'm surprised at the number of people who have reacted to my post.

I do consider the tie between Hobbes and Snoopy to be relatively minor, and am convinced that the two major influences on the strip were "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty" and the Chuck Jones series of cartoons about the daydreaming boy.

Yeah, I think Hobbes is more derivative of Snoopy, although it wouldn't surprise me to find that Watterston watched the old Rocky-Bullwinkle series. If there's a Pogo influence to the strip, I think it's when he tries to get philosophical, which I thought were some of the weaker story lines. Walt Kelly was a master of weaving political subthemes. Watterston did on occasion, but the results were far less effective.

I wasn't claiming that Watterston stole the characters, simply that they were strong influences. From the reaction I'm getting, I may have left the impression that I thought Watterston sat down with Peanuts and Garfield strips and copied storylines, which is not the case.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.