LOS ANGELES (AP) — In a copyright trial that involved motion-capture technology, a US jury has ruled that Disney owes $600,000. The trial centered on allegations made by a company called SAG-AFTRA, which represents performers, that Disney used its members’ performances in blockbuster films without authorization. The trial lasted for three weeks and ended with the jury issuing a verdict in favor of SAG-AFTRA.
Motion-capture technology, which involves recording an actor’s movements and digitally transferring them onto a computer-generated character, has become increasingly popular in the film industry. This trial shed light on the legal issues surrounding the use of this technology.
Disney argued that it had properly obtained the rights to use the performances and that SAG-AFTRA did not have standing to sue. However, the jury sided with SAG-AFTRA and ruled that Disney should pay $600,000 in damages.
This verdict has implications for future copyright cases involving motion-capture technology. It establishes a precedent that performers have the right to control the use of their performances, even when they are digitally altered. This could lead to stricter requirements for film studios to obtain permission and pay fees for using actors’ performances in this manner.
SAG-AFTRA celebrated the jury’s decision and emphasized the importance of protecting performers’ rights. They stated that this verdict sends a message to the entertainment industry that performers deserve fair compensation for their work, regardless of how it is used.
Disney has not yet commented on the verdict. It remains to be seen whether they will appeal the decision or comply with the jury’s ruling and pay the $600,000 in damages.
In conclusion, a US jury has determined that Disney owes $600,000 in a copyright trial involving motion-capture technology. The verdict establishes a precedent for performers’ rights and may lead to stricter regulations for the use of digital performances in the film industry. SAG-AFTRA hailed the decision as a victory for performers’ rights, while Disney’s response to the ruling remains unknown.