(Untitled)

Dec 07, 2004 19:03

Be cool and spread this around to other matrix communities.
text incase site dissapears )

Leave a comment

Comments 7

Not Again! dark_puck December 8 2004, 03:30:06 UTC
Sorry, y'all, but this article has already been proven a fake. Sofia Stewart hasn't won any money yet -- she has simply been allowed to take her case to court.

Having read what little is available of her manuscript The Third Eye, I can safely say it bears more similarity to the book of Revelations than it does to the Matrix.

Reply

Re: Not Again! chrisburns December 8 2004, 03:35:40 UTC
Where has it been proven a fake?
It's not fake at all: the article says that she is
going to court, and she is going to court.

Who are you trying to protect?

Reply

Re: Not Again! nijyo December 8 2004, 03:57:31 UTC
Monday, October 4th 2004 ended a six-year dispute involving Sophia Stewart, the Wachowski Brothers, Joel Silver and Warner Brothers. Stewart's allegations, involving copyright infringement and racketeering, were received and acknowledged by the Central District of California, Judge Margaret Morrow residing.

Stewart, a New Yorker who has resided in Salt Lake City for the past five years, will recover damages from the films, The Matrix I, II and III, as well as The Terminator and its sequels. She will soon receive one of the biggest payoffs in the history of Hollywood, as the gross receipts of both films and their sequels total over 2.5 billion dollars.

The article implies that she will receive the money by saying that the dispute is ended (as a matter of fact, it flat out says she gets a settlement), not that she has a chance to make her case in court. Please read more carefully. If OP is correct, the article is indeed fake.

Also, I've seen some of the plaintiff's work, it's very, very non-Matrix related.

Reply

Re: Not Again! chrisburns December 8 2004, 04:06:34 UTC
you need to understand what
"as a matter of fact" means
it would be a matter of fact if they DID "flat out"
say she will get settlement money, but in fact it does
NOT "as a matter of fact' "flat out" say that at all,
it is very vague.

Anyway, thats not the main point at all. Why would
they settle?

Where have you seen this work and what makes you the judge of it?

Reply


Leave a comment

Up