»Inside Tip - Warner Brothers Respond«

I recieved an inside tip from sources I won't name that Bruce Issac (Popular Lawyer), called Sophia to ask if she would drop the Rico Order
against the Warner Brothers. Remember the Rico Order is the Federal Statment in which basically says that WB has lied to the Federal Government and stole property from a copyright owner.

Bruce Issac represents not only Warner Brothers, but James Cameron and Gail Ann Heard, of Warner Brothers/Motion Picture Industry.

Keep in mind people that if WB decides to lie in court under this Rico Order, they can all be arrested! Sophia is not dropping the Rico Order, that portion of the case is over $350K alone. Who wants to see a Warner Brother in jail.

The FBI will continue to allow WB to break the law and franchise the Matrix product to recieve the maximum amount for future settlement, so if WB or Issac happens to read this, my advice to you is...

RESPOND NOW.


Sophia's Update:

Sophia is going to NY to do business with Bad Boy Entertainment and talk business with other laywers by this weekend.

I'm not surprised they are asking her to drop the case.

(i) It's all a steaming pile of BS
(ii) Cases cost money
(iii) The justice system isn't always fair and sometimes the innocent party will lose the case.
(iv) The wachowski brothers don't want bad publicity even if it IS all lies.


Quite frankly if Sopia Stewart script is so similar and is therefore unusable now, WHY DOESN'T SHE POST IT ON THE INTERNET! What's she worried about? Does she think someone will steal it again?

I'm adding you to the list of people I'm telling I told you so, what's your email? LMAO.

So let's get this straight, she's just about to get started in a legal battle with the wachowskis that she has been planning since 1999? She's a bit slow ain't she?

When's she gonna sue James Cameron over Terminator (the 'mother of the matrix' site says that was stolen from her too)? She's taking forever to get her case against him sorted out. She's got three high grossing movies for the taking there to go with her matrix trilogy takings - she'll be such a rich woman when this is finished.

Y'see, the thing is that the only link to a script called The Third Eye that I have been able to find has a woman called Zeniba marked as the authour. Is there actually a link to the real script or was that it?

She has been fighting this battle SINCE 1999, there never was a planning process.

Her Rico Order in this Federal Case is all tied in with these movies, Matrix and Terminator. She will bank from all of them by the time this case is over.

(i) Terminator and The Matrix are COMPLETELY different. How can the 'Third Eye' script be like BOTH of them?

(ii) If she had terminator stolen from her then why has she never made a case against it?

(iii) The matrix plot is not original. The idea that everything around us might be a dream has been done over and over again. What is special about the matrix is the comic book style in which it was directed. Sophia Stewart did not direct it and therefore she has nothing to do with its success.

(iv) Is her script online? If not, why not?

I just plain don't get it. I mean, why are we Americans (i reluctantly admit my association here) so damned litigious? Can't we all just get along? I had two things happen to me in the past 5 years that I probably could have (some might even say should have) taken to court, but, heh, I don't have the mental stamina for that kind of stress! I mean, hey, life goes on. AND I'm a songwriter! If my lyrics were ever stolen outright, I could prove it, and sue, and make my point, but I'm not gonna do it for money, in any case. There's no point; after all the attorneys' fees are paid, you don't end up with much.

Since Fatpie's post was last, and he summed the thread up nicely, I'll just reply to that:

Fatpie42 wrote:

(i) Terminator and The Matrix are COMPLETELY different. How can the 'Third Eye' script be like BOTH of them?

Well, I don't know... I can certainly see the connection. It's silly to think that it's a valid connection, but it is an interesting idea, nonetheless... the war of the machines in Terminator equals the war of the Machines in the Second Renaissance, is basically the idea, which leads into the Matrix....

But still:

Fatpie42 wrote:

(ii) If she had terminator stolen from her then why has she never made a case against it?

...EXACTLY.

Heck, if I could only prove it.... I've had ideas all my life that, if only I had patented when I had them, I could have become a rich man.... You know those Star Wars Electronic Lightsabers that Hasbro makes? I thought up the very design back in the '80s.... I can't even remember all the prescient ideas I have had throughout my life. Just because you thought of something before someone else did doesn't mean you're entitled to the spoils when they beat you to it.

Fatpie42 wrote:

(iii) The matrix plot is not original. The idea that everything around us might be a dream has been done over and over again. What is special about the matrix is the comic book style in which it was directed. Sophia Stewart did not direct it and therefore she has nothing to do with its success.

I think this is the very point which proves that the whole thing is preposterous! Very well put, Fatpie42! Not just in the last century, or two, but for MILENNIA has this idea been kicked around. No grounds whatsoever....

Fatpie42 wrote:

(iv) Is her script online? If not, why not?

Also, right on.

It's all just hogwash, to me.

Well it seems to me that sophia is gonna get laughed out of the room when the judge realizes that her script was written after the first terminator movie. it came out before her script didnt it? i mean whats the deal with her. if it was true then this would of been settled out of court like 5 years ago.

this whole ordeal is linked to the problem of ego. examine any art form and you'll find that artists tend to start exploring the same concepts at the same time. this is natural and not surprising considering the fact that people tend to think about the same important current issues, problems, and developments. but authors need to get over themselves. they are scribes for the forces of history and society. they are secretaries for their sociohistoric contexts. plots, techniques, etc. are dictated by what's going on in the world, not by a burst of one person's creative genius. that lot of drivel went out with byron and shelley and keats and all those romantic bastards who were so full of themselves that it makes me sick to read their laughable accounts of how superior the artist is to everyone else. please. artists are no wiser than anyone else; they just happen to have mastery over their chosen art form. poets aren't sages with unique ideas, they're people who are good at putting words into lines. painters aren't sages with unique ideas, they're people who are good at putting paint on canvasses. composers aren't sages with unique ideas, they're people who are good at arranging notes. who wrote the matrix? the human race wrote the matrix, as it has written every other piece of literature ever composed. but you can't pay every human who has lived for the past several thousand years, so you pay the person who gets to the copywrite office first. airplanes flew a year or two before the wright bros. flew theirs at kitty hawk, but they got to the patent office first and we say they invented the airplane. a telephone was invented months before graham bell finished his, but he got to the patent office first, and we credit him for the invention. the superorganism of humanity invents things. the individual humans that make up humanity are deluded into thinking that they invent things. that's when we get into spats like this. who gets paid? who gets a mansion and a yacht? it is evident that matrix-esque scripts were written before the matrix came out. theft? no. several people waking up to an idea that's floating around the heads of every human because of their shared experiences? yes.

by all means let her get paid if it will shut her up. but no amount of money is going to cure her overgrown ego, or let her know just how small a role she or any other author plays in the construction of art.

d

I'm trying to be ethicle here.
I'm trying to understand both positions here. I myself never know about her and thought that someone else can create the matrix until i visited this boards.
- The thing is that the first matrix script was written about 1996, any matrix fan should know that.
- The wachowski bros don't do interviews. Therefore they don't like publicity.
- Why didn't she made a copyright? There's such a thing. I am a potential scriptwriter and any scriptwriter should know this. This is more important then even writting the script and so no one can steal it. If she did she should have won the case and i'll be supporting her but did she?
- What about the storyboards? That was a long time ago.
- I don't care if there's any connection with the matrix and terminator.
- It could be possible that she wrote the matrix which explains why m2 and 3 are so different but m1 is more beautifully crafted but how can one mind invent such a complex story?
- Why would she want to do something like this, especially using racist as a defence? If she wants to highlight racism, there are other ways. Plus, this is a big story, why is it all seem to be under the covers?
- How can so many people work under a stolen material? Especially if they know it's stolen? I read the pdf documents and found it weird that they said that carrie ann moss suggested the name to be matrix!
- I can't seem to find a raference from the third eye and the matrix! The third eye seems more like the sixth sense if you ask me.
- The wachowskis took so long to convince the producers, with the help of storyboards, to make the movies.
- I think m2 and m3 were different because they were rushing it.
- Why only the matrix was renamed, obviously she was interested in suing them only after the matrix!

That's why i say i don't believe it. And i told why.

7one wrote:

Plus, this is a big story, why is it all seem to be under the covers?

In Sophia Stewart's own words "The reason you have not seen any of this in the media is because Warner Brothers parent company is AOL-Time Warner... this GIANT owns 95 percent of the media... let me give you a clue as to what they own in the media business... New York Times papers/magazines, LA Times papers/magazines, People Magazine, CNN news, Extra, Celebrity Justice, Entertainment Tonight, HBO, New Line Cinema, DreamWorks, Newsweek, Village Roadshow... many, many more!... They are not going to report on themselves. They have been suppressing my case for years..."

Quote:

The matrix plot is not original. The idea that everything around us might be a dream has been done over and over again.

True. Look at how in the year that The Matrix was released, there were several other movies with the same theme: Truman Show, 13th Floor, Pleasantville, eXistenZ. Even American Beauty had the same theme, albeit not in a science fiction way: Kevin Costner sees through the fiction of his life and creates his own alternative reality.

Quote:

What is special about the matrix is the comic book style in which it was directed.

Sure, and that's the point. There are no end to ideas, treatments and half-baked scripts in Hollywood. It is the ability to execute them in an original way that makes the difference. "The Matrix" is not just a script, it is a wide range of artists and technicians producing something.

Another movie along the same theme: "They Live", a man finds that the world around him is an illusion created by aliens who are putting humans on the menu. The metaphor -- your society is actually your enemy -- is the same theme as "The Matrix."

"They Live" was based on a short story called "Eight O'Clock in the Morning", an incredible tale of paranoia and alienation. You can sometimes find it in sci fi anthologies.

Speaking of paranoia and alienation, there is Robert Heinlein's story, "They". An inmate in an insane asylum is convinced that the world is an illusion created by god-like beings to keep him ignorant of his own true powers. And in the end -- it turns out he is right!

And consider the Star Trek: TNG episodes in which virtual reality and the real world mix via the holo-deck, or aliens are playing mind games with the crew. All of these pre-dated The Matrix:

Professor Moriarty attempts to escape the holo-deck by making Picard et alia think they are on the ship when they are within the holo-deck itself.

Ryker is doing a stage play when he finds himself in an alien insane asylum from which escape proves a delusion.

Dr Crusher finds everyone on the Enterprise is disappearing and yet no one has any memory of them ever existing.

Sleeping crew members are kidnapped by extra-dimensional aliens who perform bizarre experiments on them, then return them before they awake.

Data dreams of aliens sucking the peptides out of crew members amd finds out he is right (i.e., humans as energy source theme).

The Enterprise is stuck within a space warp that causes them to lose their ability to dream, thereby driving crew members insane (a reverse on the unreality theme).

The Enterprise gets caught in a time loop in which it is destroyed at the end of every iteration, until the crew reloads the situation (Enterpise as Zion 6.0, so to speak).

Quote:

In Sophia Stewart's own words "The reason you have not seen any of this in the media is because Warner Brothers parent company is AOL-Time Warner... this GIANT owns 95 percent of the media...

Incorrect. SIX major companies own 95% of all media. If AOL-Time Warner owned 95%, Viacom, Sony, Turner, MSNBC and Disney would be scraping over a measly 5%.

Anyone who would say this and believe it would definitely not have the mental capacity to craft The Matrix, or even a similar story worth suing over.

Period.

<$0

Excellent point, PoorBoy; you can't say any one company owns a majority of anything, or you start getting into conspiracy theories. Besides, antitrust laws may have loopholes big enough to drive studio vans through, but they do keep a bit of balance in the system.

When I was in college, there were the 'Big Six': six media conglomerates that made up most (I don't think we ever had a percentage, or indeed a number of any kind) of the world's media (especially concerning the music business, which was my area of study).
At the time, those Six were:

1) Time Warner (formerly Time Publications and Warner Communications International; later AOL Time Warner; now it's just Time Warner again, though AOL is still a part of it.)

2) Polygram (owned by the parent company Philips Electronics of Holland, makers of Magnavox products and inventors of compact disk technology)

3) BMG (a German company, owned by the parent company Bertelsmann AG, with a few major individual stockholders)

4) EMI (English company, owned by parent Thorn Electric and Musical Industries [Thorn EMI])

5) MCA (Canadian, formerly Music Corporation of America, parented by The Seagrams Company and Matsushita Denki [means 'Electric'] Industrial of Japan; it is now known as Vivendi Universal)

6) Sony (a wholly owned subsidiary of the Sony Corporation of Japan)

Now, back in around 1999, Polygram and Seagram (Universal) merged, leaving only the Big Five. Some say that Disney ABC has taken up the other spot, making a new Big Six--not too far fetched, really. At the time I was studying it, however, Disney and Dreamworks SKG were sort of together, and the Universal/Polygram Merger had not yet happened, so I may not even be wholly accurate now. Still, I'll bet I'm pretty close.

Viacom and CBS (Columbia Broadcast System), also merged in 1999, making them quite a bit bigger than when I was at university. Viacom also owns Paramount, a studio that was once owned by MCA (Universal). MSNBC is owned by General Electric and Universal, with help from Microsoft, which has a sort of partnership with Disney, but they are not otherwise connected. Strangely (or perhaps not), NBC and CBS were both subsidiaries of RCA, a company created by GE and Westinghouse. In the beginning of the company, one of the two major radio networks owned by RCA was relinquished, under governmental pressure, and later became ABC. It's all pretty inbred, when you think about it.

AnaisKarim, you said,

Quote:

They are not going to report on themselves. They have been suppressing my case for years..."

What case are you talking about?

ok, Ive been lurking this forum and a bunch of the websites talkign about this for a while and I just dont understand you guys? How can you DOUBT her? Im a William Gibson Fan, and Avid Shadowrun player, and a scifi buff. The Matrix is as unoriginal a film as you can get. Its a condensation of scifi novles and ideas from over the past 70 years, with a little bible thrown in. While I understand the stigma around lawsuits, the avid fanboy-ism that infects us all, the obvious forces of greed that are in play, but if her work DID influence the Matrix as she claims, it sure would exlain a whole lot ( why the firts one was plot, and the other two were SF jerkoffs).

I wish we could read her entire treatment, see the actual work that she claims spawned these movies. But i can understand why she would not be alowed to release them (angling by the Warner lawyers to gag the case), because if its the bombshell that she claims it is, and it gets out b4 the case is (they hope squashed and dismissed), then Warner and the Wachowskis have a fireball on their hands.

I would also like to point out how hollywood is quite in bed with the US justice department (the p2p whichhunt the mpaa is o-so-successfully starting becuase it greases the gears of "justice"). And since we know how powerful they are, how good their lawyers are, and this thing is actualy going forward, going to trial, hasnt been dismissed as they tried to have it, then there HAS to be some credibility. You cant scoff it away and say its a "steaming pile of BS".

Its also true that "The justice system isn't always fair and sometimes the innocent party will lose the case." A lot of you like to point out OJ sometimes, as to the inaccuracies of the justice system. But let me remind you, OJ had money, thats why he walked. Enron CEOs had money, thats why they arent strung from trees, Martha had money, thats why she only got (what was it 6 months or some crap) instead of 5 years, as some of the smaller fish caught by the SEC in the 80s got. Here we have bigwig powerhouse media moguls, who in all their infinite resources, cant make one woman and a stack of paper go away. Why? Simple, becuase there is some truth.

As far as media supression, I totally believe it. Look ay what gets reported. I remember when the woman who claimed she lost a winning lotto ticket. That made national news, and her story was so baseless it was funny. But this, 2 hit movie franchises stolen from one woman back in the 80s? Thats a scoop! Why WOULDNT that get reported! You say they simply want to avoid bad press, but who? The wachowskis? They couldnt possibly manipulate so much of th media to censure. But what if its the big WB? What if their heads are on the block? Makes sense.

I want everyne here to drop the fanboyism. The wachowskis dont love you. neither does this woman. So why should you be loyal to one or the other. Use logic, use unbiased observation, and search for the truth. I think she may be telling the truth, I dont have enough information, but no one does except the lawyers. Dont throw this woman away, calling the case BS or shes crazy or whatever.

But Id like to quote the great Miller
"thats just my opinion, I could be wrong"

Quote:

I want everyne here to drop the fanboyism. The wachowskis dont love you. neither does this woman. So why should you be loyal to one or the other. Use logic, use unbiased observation, and search for the truth. I think she may be telling the truth, I dont have enough information, but no one does except the lawyers. Dont throw this woman away, calling the case BS or shes crazy or whatever.

There are many reasons I don't believe this woman and call her nuts. But before I begin my argument I just want to say that if "The Matrix" was stolen from her then she's entitled to every penny she gets and good for her. But the facts just don't add up. Not only does her name change from website to website, also the name on the page of "The Third Eye" is Zenia(who is Zenia? A Pen name?). Sophia's story changes as well, just WTF is "The Third Eye"? A Script? A Treatment? A possible thing for a comic book? Not only that but when she copyrighted her thing in 1981 and then she claimed that the Wachowski's then took this Script/treatment/comic book idea from her in 1984, so what they stole the script when Andy was 17 and Larry was 19? And if the Wachowski's stole the friggin thing how the hell did James Cameron get it? When The Terminator would have gone into priduction in 1983?
Not only does her story change but the two pages of The Third Eye that are availible are awful. They are poorly written and only show a passing resemblence to "The Matrix" and "The Terminator" movies. However, I have not read the entire treatment so I can not say if it does or does not. But Ms. Stewarts story is so full of holes, I mean seriously if you want people to believe you at least keep your story straight from one source to another...even sources that are sub companies of your companies. Also if you haven't yet got to daghettotymez.com and look at Ms. Stewart's interview, she never answers a single question in any real sense.
Also Time Warner does not own 95% of the media! Aslo because this has got to be the biggest story of copyright infirngement in history why the hell wouldn't Disney report on this? Or the AP, or some news paper and not just random websites and a community college paper whose information turned out to be wrong...not misleading but blatantly WRONG.
And before six different people post yelling at me for being a Wachowski fan boy, this is just not the case. Like I said before if they did steal the idea from Ms. Stewart than they should be taken to court. But Stewart's story is just so full of holes that it doesn't add up, and as has been stated before the ideas presented in The Matrix are not new at all.

[Speaking of paranoia and alienation, there is Robert Heinlein's story, "They". An inmate in an insane asylum is convinced that the world is an illusion created by god-like beings to keep him ignorant of his own true powers. And in the end -- it turns out he is right![/quote]


Merv in the Hell Club scene said to Trin that "love looked like insanity"

The matrix may have been an asylum for for the "machines" whose programs had lost it lol. Neo looked like he was having old fashion "shock therapy" in the end....

while I can understand your speculation, a quick serach of your own forums brings up this.

Klisejo,
question - I assume you are posting from somewhere inside America (not Canada or Mexico). Correct?

Reason I ask, is because I wonder how much faith you put in your media to report world events that try to be as non-biased or non-judgemental of the current government as is humanly possible given the the U.S.A's ( media and federal government's)huge sphere of influence within the world.

I put about as much faith in the media reporting something, as I do you. I always assume a source is biased.

But what, praytel, does my "faith" in media have anything to do with wether or not Sofia is full of crap?

Why is no one talking about Williiam Gibson, who published the best-selling book "The Neuromancer" in 1983 and is obviously more than just "an influence" on the plot of The Matrix movieis?

Why isn't stewart suing him? Why isn't Gibson suing the Wachowskis?

Think about it.

Thats why I maintain that the matrix movies are some fo the most unoriginal movies ever made. But what they took from Gibson is simply "the matrix". Gibsons matrix, as you know, was just an 3d internet, one interlaced with VR, and not like the wachowski matrix, which as you know, is nothing but VR. I would have made a stink, if I wer gibson, for them simply to not use "the matrix" and call their junk somehting else. Cuz I really want to see a Neuromancer movie. To bad Johnny Neumonic bombed.