Disney was the subject of a copyright lawsuit alleging that the widely popular Moana the franchise was almost entirely taken from a decades-old storyline without the writer’s consent.
In a trial examined by Weekly Entertainment which was filed Friday, animator Buck Woodall claims that former Mandeville Films development director Jenny Marchick violated his copyright by secretly transmitting to Disney documents he had confidentially produced for her years ago. two decades ago. This material, asserts Woodall, has become Moana And Moana 2.
A court ruling last November prevented Woodall from filing an identical suit against the original 2016 film because the filing would have come too late. Although the complaint filed by Woodall on Friday contains numerous allegations about the first Moana film, most of his argument focuses on the sequel released in November 2024.
Disney representatives did not immediately respond. Weekly Entertainmentrequest for comment.
Woodall’s suit alleges a “fraudulent enterprise involving the theft, misappropriation and extensive exploitation of Woodall’s copyrighted materials” led by Marchick, who is now head of development at DreamWorks Animation. Mandeville Films had an initial deal with Disney, as well as offices on the Disney lot in Burbank, California, at the time of Marchick’s relationship with Woodall.
Want more movie news? Register for Free Entertainment Weekly newsletter to get the latest trailers, celebrity interviews, movie reviews and much more.
The animator claims to have delivered to Marchick “extremely large amounts of intellectual property and trade secrets” related to a project called “Bucky” and “Bucky the Wave Warrior” between 2003 and 2008. These documents included a complete script, illustrations of characters, budgets, a fully animated concept trailer, storyboards, background image references, and much more.
Woodall also notes that he received copyright protection on these materials in 2004, which was updated in 2014.
Disney
“Bucky” was never developed, but Woodall claims Marchick was able to pass his materials to Disney by exploiting legal loopholes inherent in the “tapestry of confusion” that is Disney’s complex corporate structure. According to Woodall, “Bucky” not only became Moana without his consent, but continued to serve as the basis for Moana 2 Also.
The suit lists a number of similarities between Woodall’s undeveloped screenplay and Moana And Moana 2. Like “Bucky,” the first film follows a teenager on an outrigger canoe journey across Polynesian waters to save Polynesian lands. It features the Polynesian belief that spirit ancestors manifest as animal guides, along with a number of details including a symbolic necklace, navigation by stars, a lava goddess, and a giant creature disguised as a mountainous island.
As for Moana 2the suit notes that details such as rooster and pig companions, a mission to break a curse, a whirlpool leading to an ocean portal, and an encounter with the warrior Kakamora tribe were all lifted without “Bucky’s” consent.
While Woodall claims in the new suit that Disney failed to provide all of the documents requested in the previous suit, Disney submitted documents relating to Moana including story ideas, first drafts of screenplay, research notes and presentation materials.
Woodall is seeking damages of 2.5 percent of Moana‘s gross revenues, equivalent to $10 billion, and a court order confirming its copyright and prohibiting further infringement.