SHARE

Do you ever feel a cold chill on a hot summer night?

Ever felt like someone was staring at you despite being completely alone?

Have you seen The Conjuring?

It was good, right? Had that one clap scene, and that thing with the flying lady; classic.

On to the actual news!

Since the dawn of movies, filmmakers have looked at real life people, memoirs, and event for some inspiration. A lot of the best films out there have been adapted from the literary works of other writers.

2013’s The Conjuring and it’s sequel The Conjuring 2 (creative name, guys, A+), also fall under that adapted works umbrella.

Both center around Ed and Lorraine Warren (as the opening credits say); real life people who have famously worked on several paranormal cases.

When the two started gaining popularity for their ghostly adventures in the 70s, they were approached by a writer named Gerald Brittle who was looking to write a book based on the Ghost Hunting Duo.

Cut to 1980 and Brittle writes a book titled The Demonologist; 30 or so years later Warner Bros. makes a movie deal with the Warrens and thus The Conjuring 1 and 2, and Annabelle were born.

Where’s the issue?

Well, when Brittle made his deal with the Warrens, a stipulation in the contract stated a no “competing works” clause.

What this meant is that the Warrens did not have the legal right to be a part of any deals based on their paranormal stories.

The only person legally allowed to make anything based off of the Warren files was Gerald Brittle.

When the first Conjuring film was released, Brittle sent a cease and desist order to Warner Bros.

However, WB continued forth with their plans for the franchise and released The Conjuring 2: Ghostly Boogaloo (despite being legally fought against by Brittle), and the spin-off, Annabelle.

#FuckTheLaw

Cut to this year and Brittle is getting a lot more serious with his case.

Several weeks ago, Brittle submitted a 355 page complaint to Virginia Federal Court aiming to get $900 million in damages from Warner Bros. for their multiple accounts of copyright infringements on stories he has legal ownership of.

What did WB do?

They denied all accounts of copyright infringement and said that they did not use Brittle’s book The Demonologist as a source for any of the films.

Instead, they say that their film’s are based on “historical facts.”

So….yeah.

Despite being pointed to several instances of similarity between the book and the films and a Tweet made several years ago by James Wan (director of The Conjuring) in which he says:

I watch/read a lot of scary stories. But f—, THE DEMONOLOGIST, true life account of Ed & Lorraine Warren, is the scariest book I’ve read.”

WB seems to be sticking to their guns with their whole ‘based on historical facts’ stance.

What now?

Unless Warner Bros. is willing to cough up $900 million, they will have to prove that:

1.) The events in the films actually happened

2.) Ed and Lorraine’s stories are factual 

3.) GHOST ARE REAL

Not the most standard of lawsuits, but really makes you appreciate the fact that we are alive during a time that this type of legal battle exists.

WB has yet to come up with any proof of ghosts in real life, but I think we should all sit patiently while a film company makes one of the biggest scientific discoveries ever.

You know…beside all those medical advancements and stuff.

Also I made a meme; enjoy:

Warner Bros.