this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2026

46 points (97.9% liked)

Television

television@piefed.social

3,471 readers

2,513 active

148 users here now

Welcome to Television

This community is for discussion of anything related to television or streaming.

Other Communities

Television Communities

!britishtelly@feddit.uk

A community for discussion of anything related to Television via broadcast or streaming.

Rules:

Be respectful and courteous to all members.
Avoid offensive or discriminatory remarks.
Avoid spamming or promoting unrelated products/services.
Avoid personal attacks or engaging in heated arguments.
Do not engage in any form of illegal activity or promote illegal content.
Please mask any and all spoilers with spoiler tags.

List of Best Rated TV Series as voted by the Fediverse

founded 2 years ago

moderators

Skavau@piefed.social

BoozeOrWater@piefed.social

MimicJar@lemmy.world

Skavau@lemmy.world

'The Pitt's Battle With Michael Crichton Estate Heading To Trial (deadline.com)

submitted 2 days ago by Skavau@piefed.social to c/television@piefed.social

23 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 23 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 1 day ago (18 children)

Fuck Skydance, but Crichton's estate trying to shut down any medical drama because ER did a similar thing is stupid.

It ended, but what about The Good Doctor?

hideshow 18 child comments

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (4 children)

It's not just that it was a copy, it's that the estate was in talks for an ER reboot, those died, and then The Pitt was announced with one of the principal actors from ER. It really reads like the estate thought it was getting a payday and is pissed it missed the check.

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 12 points 1 day ago (1 child)

The Pitt being in real-time really differentiates itself despite the similarities. I think the estate has a an uphill battle to argue

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Oh, I don't think they have a leg to stand on. A rando has a better shot at proving that some famous author stole their idea than this "only not a SLAPP because the courts decided it wasn't" suit has.

parent

[–] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

There was a frozen rights clause in the original contract of ER that forbade a remake.

parent

[–] cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 21 hours ago

So they would have been fine with it if Noah Wyle hadn't been in it? Wild to think they think they own the concept of Noah Wyle playing a doctor.

I thought they did reboot/bring back ER for a season?

parent

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 3 points 1 day ago (10 children)

The good doctor was already a copy.

parent

hideshow 10 child comments

[–] cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 21 hours ago (9 children)

What about House, M.D.? Should no one, ever, be able to make another medical drama?

parent

hideshow 9 child comments

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 0 points 9 hours ago (8 children)

That isnt the Crichton estate’s contention

parent

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] Duhtocqueville@ttrpg.network 1 point 5 hours ago (7 children)

There contention is they’ll find their case in discovery. Ie given enough time they can make it work.

I’m not sure why you view that as meaningful different than any medical drama.

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 1 point 5 hours ago* (6 children)

Their contention is that WBTV recruited John Wells (ER Showrunner), R Scott Gemmill (ER EP/writer) and Noah Wyle (ER star) to develop an ER reboot. This isnt in question and all have been open about it.

The dispute is that when the ER reboot fell through, Crichton claims that they just carried on with the show under a different title. WBTV, Wells, Gemmill and Wyle claim that it is a wholly different project that did not evolve from the ER reboot, but just came along immediately after the reboot fell through, with the same group of people.

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] Duhtocqueville@ttrpg.network 0 points 5 hours ago* (5 children)

I forgot that the estate owned these people’s minds, experience, working relationships and future products.

What is their argument apart from base slavery? That four people were hired to be creative, were creative, and ended up making a show?

Crichton gets rights to his creative work but not those four?

Anything I’m missing?

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 1 point 5 hours ago* (4 children)

Yes, a lot clearly. They were hired to work on an ER reboot, which means that any work they did for that project is derivative of the rights held by the Crichton estate, which therefore has ownership stake and under their contract, any use of that material had to be approved by Crichton or his estate.

If The Pitt is proven to be the ER reboot reskinned, the Crichton estate are owed ownership stake, and a payout for violation of their contractual rights and for copyright infringement.

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] Duhtocqueville@ttrpg.network 1 point 5 hours ago (3 children)

Why would “any work” done for the project be derivative of the underlying IP? Keep in mind we are under a substantial incorporation standard.

Looking at the two substantial incorporation doesn’t appear present.

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 1 point 5 hours ago (2 children)

Because thats how copyright law works.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Duhtocqueville@ttrpg.network 1 point 5 hours ago (1 child)

I see your problem there. It’s not. The word derivative isn’t as broadly defined as in common use.

Haven’t you ever noticed tmnt and biker mice from mars are similar? Or Star Trek and Orville?

You realize 50 shades of grey started as a twighlight fanfic?

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 1 point 4 hours ago

It is derivative, in the sense used by the film/TV industry. You may not be aware but US TV is written work-for-hire, meaning that the writer gives up their rights. In this case, anything written or developed for the ER Pilot would be assigned to WBTV and be subject to their contractual arrangements with Crichton. Anything derived further from that material would also come under the same arrangement.

The Crichton position is that WBTV on the sly tried to shift work product from under the auspices of their arrangement and into a “new” production, to the loss of Crichton.

parent

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 1 point 9 hours ago

The Good Doctor was a remake of a Korean show.

parent

[–] Malgas@beehaw.org 1 point 15 hours ago

TIL The Pitt isn't an ER spin-off/sequel.

Obviously I'm not really into either, or I'd have probably noticed before now that Noah Wiley plays two different characters.

parent

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 3 points 1 day ago

Next they’ll sue the creators of St. Elsewhere.

[–] phonics@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

What a stupid case.

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 child)

It’s not really stupid. Warners and the Crichton estate were in talks about an ER reboot and when negotiations failed, Warner went through with the project anyway.

It will be interesting to see in the discovery phase just how much of the original project outline relates to the current show.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Zannsolo@lemmy.world 1 point 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Even if it was the same premise they pitched them the only they they were bringing to the table was the name. The show isn't very similar to ER beyond it being an Emergency room focused medical drama. Everything that is similar to ER is also similar to every other medical show.

Honestly the show is better off not being titled ER, and the estate could have gotten an easy payday but were too greedy it seems.

Maybe if they pitched the studio let's make an ER reboot with dr. Carter running cook country general's ER and each season covers a single shift the could have a claim.

parent