Disney takes the first step in Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow suit

“The clear and comprehensive language of the arbitration agreement easily covers a periwinkle complaint,” states the motion to enforce arbitration. In a vain attempt to avoid this inevitable outcome (and generate publicity through a public dossier), Periwinkle has excluded Marvel as a party in this lawsuit — rather than replacing parent company Disney in contract interference theories. Allow such dexterity. “.

Move to Strengthen Arbitration Not Unexpectedly While the Disney Papers first clarifies the exact language of the arbitration award (see here), the company’s lawyers are also pointing out legal minor points at this point, but they are sure to draw attention.

For example, Disney says: Black Widow It’s shown on more than 9,000 screens in the US, and it’s set to make good on its promise to have at least 1,500 cinematic screens (again, Johansson insists it should be a movie exclusive), and according to the latest filings, August 15, Black Widow It has generated over $367 million in receipts worldwide and over $125 million in streamed and downloaded receipts.

Disney equations Black Widow Against other films in the Marvel Canon, which said its opening weekend was “more than many other Marvel Cinematic Universe films, including” Thor: The Dark World; ant Man; Ant man and the wasp; employment Guardians of the universe. “

“Despite the impressive pandemic-era image and decision to honor Periwinkle by streaming and downloading coupons, Periwinkle was not satisfied,” the move continues.

While it may not be necessary at this point, the legal documents also address Johansson’s contract theories and provide evidence, including one in which a Marvel attorney once told the deal’s attorneys in writing, “We fully understand Scarlett’s desire to be photographed and that the entire deal is based on The premise that the film will be shown as widely as our other films.”

While Periwinkle attempts to question the contract’s obvious language by citing the pre-pandemic period, a 2019 email from a Marvel executive only confirmed Marvel’s intent to stick to the “broad theatrical release.” A clause of the contract – which Marvel eventually did, despite the dramatically changed conditions of the 2020-2021 global pandemic.”

This is of course open to interpretation. The question at the moment – which is not entirely unimportant and could influence the course of future disputes – is whether a translation judge or arbitrator will take on the task.