I must admit my Google Foo is weak.

I have heard a rumor that the Wachaowski Brothers ripped off a contestant in a sci-fi writing contest for the original Matrix movie, giving the woman no credit for the concept, the plot or the story, yet during shooting of the film, they referred to her work constantly.

Has anyone else heard about this and can you post links with more concrete-ish information?

Oddly enough, I get a lot of hits on my site on the subject - especially from Yahoo - because of some brief conversation on my (first) message board.

The woman's name was Sophia Stewart, and her story was The Third Eye. One of the stories I know of was http://www.mi2n.com/press.php3?press_nb=58221

I haven't heard much about it since, but it was an interesting fiasco.

Thanks, this is the kind of information I was looking for.
I have also heard that the trial has been concluded, and the judgement was in favor of the original author.

I could understand the Matrix complaint by her, but what I don't understand was the Terminator complaint...was that ever really explained better?

Not really sure. For such blockbusters, there has not been that much media coverage. Let the "First Dog" take a crap on the White House lawn and it's front page news, but find out someone made a 200+ million dollar movie but plagerized the script concepts and there's nothing.

I read about this somewhere... I think on the Penny-Arcade forums.
(They had a link to a Salt Lake City paper, so that would be a start.)

Her reason about the whole thing being under the radar is the fact that she's going up against Time-Warner. Anyone wanna guess how much of the media they own? (Both print and airwaves) So naturally they can control what gets released to the media becuase they are the media.

yeah, but still...what the hell is with her getting on The Terminator.
They gave credit to their inspired writer, who, back then, threatened to sue because they almost forgot to add him into the credits.
So I'm a little lost.

From what I've gathered, the "inspired writer" plagiarized her.

Though it does explain some of the similarities between the storylines.

um....dude.
The similarities are some that I could draw from Star Wars!

And probably many other movies as well.
But regardless of all that, where do I go to read something of this complaint in her words, or at least from her side of the table?

The woman is quite clearly out of her mind:

http://davidpoland.typepad.com/thehotblog/...on_termina.html

For crying out loud, people.

Time Warner is covering the whole thing up because Time Warner's real master, Mr. Gray, has given orders from the mothership that this woman be discredited. Not because the Matrix franchise is all that important, but because once she has been discredited, the secret information she has about Kennedy and the recent tsunami will find no audience with the Right People.

Simple math: two relatively unknown filmmakers like a piece of material from an unknown writer, and want to make it into a film. They can A.) steal it, risking scandal and litigation that will cost a million dollars even if they win, or B.) give her fifty grand for it, which, on a film like Matrix, is about the same as the catering budget.

Why would they steal?

This isn't getting much press because there are a score of these nuisance suits going on in Hollywood at any one time, and very few of them get anywhere.

It's absurd to claim to own an idea as broad as "humans battle intelligent machines". Can I own "American soldiers fight in the Battle of the Bulge"? Or "humans battle an alien invasion"? "British spies versus Soviet"? How about "boy meets girl"?

Actually, Mr. Man, she might be quite sane.

Sue. Ask for $200 million and that the Wachowskis be shot.

Time Warner does some math and sees that even defending against your law suit and winning will take years and a lot of money - say a million dollars. And, on the off chance that they lose, it'll cost them not only the lawyers fees but also the $200 million, and they'll have to shoot the Wachowskis.

So instead, you offer the woman a $750,000 out-of-court settlement to drop the matter forever. Woman takes the offer, walks away 3/4ths of a million richer. This is probably what she's hoping for.

The problem for the plaintiff is that Time Warner understands that if you start settling like this, you're inviting a flood of these lawsuits.

The other problem with something like this is that it makes it damn near impossible for legitimate writers to get a studio to even look at a script, because the studio is terrifically gunshy of looking at your script about a boy and his dog growing up in rural Texas in the 1960s, rejecting it, and then getting sued for plagiarism by you five years later when they do a movie about a boy and his dog fighting terrorists on board a spacestation in the year 2157.

Insane or not, she already won the suit. So even if she was insane, apparently she was right.

Oh hey... interesting. I just noticed a correction added to that article indicating that she did not yet win the case, merely that she was allowed to continue the case - all motions to dismiss it were denied - and that it will be brought before the Central District Court of California.

She does, however, have FBI investigation documents to back up her claims, so its not like she's making this up. Also, she took it to court in Utah because she lives in Utah - I dont think taking something to court in the town in which you live really constitutes an attempt to 'play the system' or whatever, as CountZero seemed to imply. I'm interested in seeing how it plays out in the end, but I'm having trouble tracking down information concerning when the final court date is scheduled.

Probably because civil cases in federal court last for years (Federal judges hear criminal and civil cases together, and criminal cases get priority), and since the C.D. Cal. is the district for Los Angeles, the next hearing probably won't be for months. Additionally, federal judge don't really like to, you know, hear arguments in court.

The case is Docket No. CV 03-2873-MMM(VBKX), btw.

Furthermore, the SCO case is in C.D.Cal., and the Grokster case originated in the same district. Shockingly, they seem to have a grasp on IP issues. And if they don't, well, that's why Federal judges have externs and clerks amongst their entourages.

If this woman had in fact won a case claiming to be the original creator of both The Matrix and The Terminator franchises, two of the biggest science fiction franchises of the past twenty years, I think we would be seeing that reported in Time, Newsweek, The New York Times, CNN.com, Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, The London Times...

As it is...and as much as this damages my belief in the infallibity of journalism...it seems that the student paper at Salt Lake Community College got it wrong. But I admire their integrity for putting a "correction" at the bottom of the article that says, "BTW, it turns out all of the above is total fiction, so, you know, never mind."

Farlander, what's your source for the information that this woman has FBI documents that back up her claims? I tried to check that story you linked to, but now the link leads to an "Enter info here to read our paper" page. (I can't imagine why they might have taken that story down...)

While there may have been an FBI investigation into her claim, that doesn't necessarily mean that the FBI agrees that she has been ripped off.

And it's a ridiculous claim, anyway...the Wachowskis are skulking around the Nubuchadnezzar set with a copy of her short story stuffed in their shoulder bag with the title page ripped off? Come on.

This is quoted from that story I linked (which, BTW, still works for me)