The Borat movie pulled in another $29 million over the weekend. Success is not without its drawbacks. Maybe you heard two of the frat-boys had filed suit claiming they were duped into signing a release after the film makers got them drunk as skunks. You know, they may have a point. Well, I’m not a lawyer. I only spent three years in law school. So just take what I say with a grain of salt.
Now, however, other victims from the film are grumbling and dollar signs are starting to form in their eyes. Look for other lawsuits. Success brings out the opportunists. Remember the legal challenges to J. K. Rowling’s Harry Potter? And Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code?
Why am I not surprised by this lack of personal responsibility? Lesson to be learned from the “Learnings” -- read what you are signing. That’s is unless you are drunk as a skunk or a frat-boy.
2 comments:
Since you have knowledge about both law and journalism (and Borat *is* a journalist. lol), you could probably answer this...
I've read the summary of what exactly the lawsuit is about at ENN:
http://celebs.electronicnewsnetwork.com/sacha-cohen/borat-sued-by-frat-boys.php
and it states at the end that the lawsuit may have merit if indeed the frat boys were drunk when they signed the consent forms.
All I know about that is what I've seen on 'Judge Judy' - i.e. a contract is invalid if the person is intoxicated when they sign it. That makes sense to me and it's alledgely what happened in this case.
Personally I have very little sympathy for those frat boys since they felt free to make sexist and racist comments only because they thought no one in the USA would see this Borat 'documentary'. But in the legal sense... don't they have a case?
Just wondering. :)
I guess cases like this one are why we have lawyers and judges. My inclination is that the producers may have crossed the line.
Post a Comment