Black Author wins The Matrix Copyright Infringement Case

[Marcia L. McNair]

Sharing information from Editor Greg Thomas who writes:

[] This little known story has met a just conclusion, as Sophia Stewart, African American author of The Matrix will finally receive her just due from the copyright infringement of her original work!!!

A six-year dispute has ended involving Sophia Stewart, the Wachowski Brothers, Joel Silver and Warner Brothers. Stewart's allegations, involving copyright infringement and racketeering, were received and acknowledged by the Central District of California, Judge Margaret Morrow presiding.

Stewart, a New Yorker who has resided in Salt Lake City for the past five years, will recover damages from the films, The Matrix I, II and III, as well as The Terminator and its sequels. She will soon receive one of the biggest payoffs in the history of Hollywood , as the gross receipts of both films and their sequels total over 2.5 billion dollars.

Stewart filed her case in 1999, after viewing the Matrix, which she felt had been based on her manuscript, 'The Third Eye,' copyrighted in 1981. In the mid-eighties Stewart had submitted her manuscript to an ad placed by the Wachowski Brothers, requesting new sci-fi works..

According to court documentation, an FBI investigation discovered that more than thirty minutes had been edited from the original film, in an attempt to avoid penalties for copyright infringement. The investigation also stated that 'credible witnesses employed at Warner Brothers came forward, claiming that the executives and lawyers had full knowledge that the work in question did not belong to the Wachowski Brothers.' These witnesses claimed to have seen Stewart's original work and that it had been 'often used during preparation of the motion pictures.' The defendants tried, on several occasions, to have Stewart's case dismissed, without success.

Stewart has confronted skepticism on all sides, much of which comes from Matrix fans, who are strangely loyal to the Wachowski Brothers. One on-line forum, entitled Matrix Explained has an entire section devoted to Stewart. Some who have researched her history and writings are open to her story.

Others are suspicious and mocking. 'It doesn't bother me,' said Stewart in a phone interview last week, 'I always knew what was true.'

Some fans, are unaware of the case or they question its legitimacy, due to the fact that it has received little to no media coverage. Though the case was not made public until October of 2003, Stewart has her own explanation, as quoted at aghettotymz.com:

'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 and many, many more! They are not going to report on themselves. They have been suppressing my case for years.'

Fans who have taken Stewart's allegations seriously, have found eerie mythological parallels, which seem significant in a case that revolves around the highly metaphorical and symbolic Matrix series. Sophia, the Greek goddess of wisdom has been referenced many times in speculation about Stewart. In one book about the Goddess Sophia, it reads, 'The black goddess is the mistress of web creation spun in her divine matrix.'

Although there have been outside implications as to racial injustice (Stewart is African American), she does not feel that this is the case. 'This is all about the Benjamins,' said Stewart. 'It's not about money with me. It's about justice.'

Stewart's future plans involve a record label, entitled Popsilk Records, and a motion picture production company, All Eyez On Me, in reference to God. 'I wrote The Third Eye to wake people up, to remind them why God put them here. There's more to life than money,' said Stewart. 'My whole to the world is about God and good and about choice, about spirituality over 'technocracy'.'

If Stewart represents spirituality, then she truly has prevailed over the 'technocracy' represented in both the Terminator and the Matrix, and now, ironically, by their supposed creators.

Stewart is currently having discussions with CBS about a possible exclusive story and has several media engagements in the near future to nationally publicize her victory. June 13th 2004. Sophia Stewart's press release read: 'The Matrix & Terminator movie franchises have made world history and have ultimately changed the way people view movies and how Hollywood does business, yet the real truth about the creator and creation of these films continue to elude the masses because the hidden secret of the matter is that these films were created and written by a Black woman...a Black woman named Sophia Stewart. But Hollywood does not want you to know this fact simply because it would change history. Also it would encourage our Black children to realize a dream and that is...nothing is impossible for them to achieve!'
I LOVE THE BUZZ THIS POSTING GENERATED! If the arguments against Stewart aren't representative of the theme in The Matrix, I don't know what is! As you read the responses, keep that idea in mind. Peace, Marcia McNair

[William Dorsey]

Let’s explore this.

Die-hard posters can not specify what elements were in Sofia Stewart's original piece, yet they are certain that those elements were used to an extent that gave the lawsuit legal standing. (How much do you want to bet that they have not even seen her book?)

They do not seem to understand that it is logically impossible to disprove a negative. A negative such as there was no substantial proof offered that there was any copyright infringement becomes "they refused to see what was put before them." (Former Beatle George Harrison was found guilty of plagiarizing the melody of "He's So Fine" in his "My Sweet Lord" and paid money appropriately. A white boy got busted and had to pay some lowly song-writer(s) from the 1960s, but when Ms. Stewart does not win, therefore it was a conspiracy. 1 + 1 = 534987.)

But wait! It was unproven because she did not show up for a critical court appearance. Oh, no, that was not of her own free will. When she didn't show up for the court appearance, it was because she was tied up somewhere by lawyers who did not want their percentage of "billions" of dollars in settlement or royalties in arrears. The fact that none of it was reported anywhere PROVES that it happened.

Somebody else states that it is still in litigation. No source for the "fact" they asserted.

They ignore any reason-based discussion and fly to the defense of Ms. Stewart by attacking whoever seems emotionally invested in the counter position(s). They react to the fact that Joe the Man reacts to them; what he says is handled by whichever part can be attacked as having been an attack; nothing to do with reasonableness.

They ignore or choose not to respond to the article by Sergio, that he pointed to in earlier posts, at .

They ignore the fact that the reappearance of exactly the same story four or five years later clearly shows the re-cycling of an internet fable AND also ignore the fact that the college newspaper that is responsible for its re-appearance checked themselves and acknowledged that it was erroneously taken as new news while withdrawing support for it (as laid out at the Snopes.com webpage on this “controversy”).

What is happening here is the same kind of non-communication that characterizes most "discussions" -- not only among Black Americans -- in which one of the parties acts/thinks as though fact is determined by belief and desire. The indication of this irrational approach in actual face-to-face discussion is the kind of argument that is based purely on the idea that whichever party can talk the loudest and/or the longest is the winner. If I can be the winner I can make it so, as Capitan Picard liked to say.

Thinking, rationality, logical attempts to determine truth -- none of these are important when a person's mentality is that truth is determined by the winner. As the satirical saying goes, "Don't confuse me with the facts; I've already got my mind made up."

It reminds me of another saying I read or heard somewhere: "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It annoys the pig and frustrates you."

And one more: "I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person."

This tendency to believe in someone because you want to is exactly how confidence crimes work. Ask Bernie Madoff's "investors." In one way or another the person who is taken chooses to operate solely on their "feeling," facts be damned, doubts ignored.

I'm out.

[Joe is the man]

Well said William Dorsey, well said.

[Jill]

IN case Anyone is Interesting Dealing w/ same topic

PEACE LOVE & CONTINUAL BLESSINGS Jill

THE ARTIST LOUNGE* Radio Show 2/21/10

*~~~~~~~~~~~*ALL ARE WELCOME*~~~~~~~~~~~~*

TOPIC : "The Industry" Guest Gregory L Hudson

Author/ Poet/Producer/Director/etc....

www.poorpennyproductions.com

Gregory/s Copyright Infringement Case Against Universal Eddie Murphy and many others...

& *Open Mic*


Category: Arts & Entertainment
Description: The Artist Lounge Podcast Supporting &Promoting all The Arts
Hosted by: Jill aka Jelly
Phone Number : [phone]
Call ID: 21235

Radio site is :http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/21 235

Date: February 21, 2010

Time: 7 pm eastern 6 pm central 5 pm mountain and 4 pm pacific time

Duration : 2 1/2 hours

Chat : http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/212 35

Call in # &ID :Phone Number : [phone]
Call ID: 21235


*OPEN MIC*

LOVE & CONTINUAL BLESSINGS Jill aka Jelly

[Bisola Marignay]

I replied yesterday to Joe the man's earlier accusation, made in December, that people posting here in support of Sophia Stewart are racists. I am now re-posting my comments because they are relevant to this conversation, and I would like feedback on the pro-active proposal that I made in concluding. The post is as follows:

Yes, the old and erroneous news about Sophia Stewart winning her copyright and racketeering suit against the Wachowski brothers, Joel Silver, and Warner Brothers for plagiarizing her screenplay and using it to produce the film, Matrix, is circulating again. Or has it ever stopped? I recently and happily received the recycled news, and knowing that justice can sometimes come as a fluke, participated in the recycling myself.

One of the recipients of my email sent a correcting response based on her research of the case that opened with “ Because I so want stories like this to be true …” And that is the crux of the matter. We do want it to be true, not because we, Black people, are racist but because we are dominated, and our properties, creative, material, intellectual, and spiritual, have been historically and routinely appropriated. So, yes we do want to see instances of triumph by those who oppose oppression. However, now that global capitalism targets most people with domination, not only Black people want stories like this to be true. Awareness of the threatening force of corporate power is uniting people of all colors and backgrounds around the world.

But, let’s be honest; we want to see Black people challenge Goliath and win, because we see ourselves in every instance of struggle against oppressive power. Our identity as a targeted people is felt in the experiences of our everyday life. We see the wasted potential of brilliance all around us, and realize, even if unable to articulate it, that oppression has limited access to our full capacity generation after generation. So, let’s not get it twisted. Those who have the power to enforce the subjection of others enact racism from a position of dominance, not those who are targeted by it.

But more importantly, what can more we do with our wanting a win for Sophia beyond recycling a dream and its reproof? Can someone get Sophia to publish The Third Eye? Are there excerpts we can circulate? We have this medium, and we know how effective it has been in casting a wide network around her case. Let’s use it to place her case in the court of public discernment. Let’s read The Third Eye, discuss it, and make up our own minds about it being the source of the Matrix.

The buzz created around that will most definitely put Sophia Stewart’s case on the media map. I mean, let’s get pass the blockage imposed by mainstream media, and at least let the world know there is a serious allegation being made. Come on now, buzz we can do! And that is a win of a kind we can be instrumental in achieving sitting at the computer.
Can we move on it

William Dorsey, I applaud your opposition to anti-intellectualism. However, it is important to understand that omission of social facts, like historical and on-going appropriation of Black cultural products, in a purely logical argument makes the argument an apology for those crimes by disregarding their significance. Being an apologist for those who perpetuate injustice against one's identity group, through which one is also a target for the same injustice, is illogical.

[Stanley Glenn Lewis]

http://www.blogcatalog.com/blog/the-divine-oracle-sophia/d1a81213e2...

You can ignore this if you want to but shortly that won't be a problem anymore...

[Stanley Glenn Lewis]

http://www.blogcatalog.com/blog/the-divine-oracle-sophia/d1a81213e2...

[William Dorsey]

(Hopefully this falls in place after Bisola Marignay's request for a response to the ending request.) If you "flip" through the prior posts, you will see that I originally acknowledged that I, too, had wanted it to be true. The reason for this desire was both that the perspective of the first movie seemed to me to be Africentrically outside of the Eurocentric mainstream AND because I am a sociology teacher, and the allegorical aspects of the concept fit quite well with the fact that social life is all too often an agreed-upon fiction rather than an accurate recognition of social or political economic reality.

But the apparent fact is that Stewart's "The Third Eye" has NEVER been published by anyone, yet the tone of the discussion here is/was largely to uncritically accept that this spurious news report was absolutely true: arguments that the case was on appeal (source?), and, as you evidence, concern that intellectual piracy had indeed occurred.

I have been talking about EuroAmerican cultural imperialism particularly in terms of black music ever since I was in grad school from '68 to '72 at Berkeley, but illogical, unfounded, faith-based insistence that an untruth is not only true but is proceeding through the courts, as far as I can see, has zero relationship to the fact that appropriation of cultural products for financial gain does, in fact, happen.

It was in the context of exactly the kind of non-interactive discussion here that I wrote my "I'm out" post. Not only did I lay out sense, but so did some before me, particularly at http://www.shadowandact.com/?p=11948 (and be sure to check out Reginald Hudlin's 10/28/2009 comment on it). When people are not honestly reading and responding to what you say, when they take it as the common "last word wins" definition of "discussion," there is absolutely no sense in further attempts to talk sense. In class (an all black 2 year college in Atlanta), I don't allow my students to "get away" with shoddy thinking; here there is no real interaction when people seize on only those aspects that they can "attack," without any intellectual accountability.

In this context, to attempt to discuss issues of capitalism (not just now; witness the designation of Joel Chandler Harris as the "author" of the Br'er Rabbit stories!) and exploitation would only feed the waste of time by giving those intellectually dishonest posters more fodder for arguing untruths on the basis of whatever the heck they find to make whatever point they think they are making. It would be like trying to get a 3-year-old to understand the consequences of actions and attitudes which do not arise in a person's life until they are 18 or 22; this discussion proves that it is no place to have a reasoned discussion. "Pearls before swine" kind of thing.

My "I'm out"comment was precisely a response to the totally nonresponsive "responses" to my and others' posts. (Actually, some of what I am recalling may have been at another site where this debate raged, albeit with less blindness. The URL for that parallel discussion is [http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/entertainment/sophia-stewart-wi...]

In the absence of an accurate analysis of the systematic steps taken by those who do the wronging, feeding this sense of being wronged only encourages the same whining, dishonest "discussion." Again: generally, people here ignore reason. Any discussion of actual cultural theft would only be taken as further "proof" of Sophia Stewart's original ownership of not only the "Matrix" creative core, but, if you read some other online discussions, some people also claim that she invented "The Terminator." (In 20 minutes, they would be claiming she wrote stuff attributed to Jules Verne from the 19th century and Aldous Huxley in 1932!)

Sure, some posters could attempt a reasoned discussion here, but that would mean wading through all of the blind faith, intellectually dishonest postings; and, again, the facts that came out would do nothing more than encourage more of the same. If people can not honestly respond to a single point, how can we expect them to grasp the import of an entire argument.

When you "flip" through the whole flow of posts to this nonstory, be sure to note how people totally avoid even referring to anyone's post that challenges them; it's like parallel universes existing in the presence of one another. Systematic protection of black creativity from exploitative predation will neither be devised nor carried out by people who make s(tuff) up. Anyone who tried to learn from Sophia Stewart's supposed tribulations would not get any useful information; I mean, if you don't show up in court for the suit you brought, who you gonna blame? At this site, people "explained" it by saying she was held incognito, that the lawyers she hired were willingly foregoing their fat percentage of a multi-million/-billion dollar settlement to protect the Warchowskis. What is the point of trying to have a reasoned discussion in this context?

And what makes it a serious allegation? Why not provide SOMEthing that at least presumes to DEMONSTRATE one's claim? I have not seen one sentence from "The Third Eye" or anything else provided as evidence; we are supposed to believe her 'cause she said so. Yes, many of us appreciate the fact that plenty has been blatantly stolen from us, from ancient "Greek" philosophy to Big Mama Thornton's "Hound Dog," but a bunch of whining, blind, nonsystematic "reasoning" only does damage to our cause. This particular claim is not worth the electrons it takes to continue to discuss it, but that is not tantamount to claiming that cultural theft does not exist. And -- one more time -- what makes THIS a proper or correct or useful or functional venue for such a discussion, given the total ignoring of both reality and reason that goes on here?

I love our people; but I am not indulgent, nor do I have any interest in ANYone who is neither emotionally mature nor intellectually honest when it comes to issues such as this. I am not enthralled by black people challenging Goliath -- particularly by someone who's inconsistent and contradictory actions leave plenty of room to suspect they are not wrapped too tight; I am only interested in black people felling Goliath and the lessons to be learned from successful -- and actual -- actions.

I need for you to lay out for me how pointedly dismissing the unrealistic and dishonest "discussion" at this site amounts to being an apologist for an exploitative system. As I think should now be crystal clear, I have no sympathy for nonsystematic, nonanalytical, emotional defense of what continues to test out as an indefensible claim; indefensible even by the claimant. The capitalist nature of this political economic system, that, in our case, is also characterized by racist exploitation, leads many of us to be/come intellectually/mentally/emotionally unhinged; pity or indulgence or "understanding" of such unhealthy conditions only grants permission for such nonproductive and often DEstructive patterns to continue. Look up the term "neurotic gratification." Every day there are cultural thefts of a real and demonstrable nature going on, but too many of us waste our time indulging in gossip-level conversations.

Under Reagan a suit that made it to but was ultimately rejected by the Supreme Court was brought by a black woman who argued that training all of those people who were promoted beyond her demonstrated discrimination. The Bakke case that kicked off the anti-affirmative action wave claimed that the mere fact that nonwhites were admitted to U.C. Davis medical school was reverse discrimination -- but the assumption that their MCAT scores were lower than Bakke's went unchallenged by the attorneys defending the admissions. Frankie Lymon's experience with being exploited by record producers provided no lesson for rappers 30-40 years later; I remember reading something where Ice Cube told how he realized that they were being exploited (but apparently left for his own reasons of interpersonal politics, not out of wider political consciousness), but if you listen to “Niggaz for Life,” you hear them “answer” him from a position that still wallowed in the kind of certainty possible only through ignorance. This is precisely the problem with the discussion here.

If I correctly understand your central point, how can you justify your counsel that I should soft-pedal the criticism I gave? How does feeding delusion and rewarding dishonest thought advance the interests of African Americans?

[William Dorsey]

(I mistakenly filed this a few paragraphs too early.) Picking up where I left off:

If I correctly understand your central point, how can you justify your counsel that I should soft-pedal the criticism I gave? How does feeding delusion and rewarding dishonest thought advance the interests of African Americans?

You made the same assumption that most everybody else made: that she EVER produced any evidence. If she did, it's not even available at a site that, to all intents and purposes, is hers. Read on.

Research the woman and her claim and the history of the case. If she had something to present, it seems she would have put it out around the time that her claim created the first buzz over half a decade ago. She could have sold hundreds of thousands of copies to us black folk at that time -- or any time since. That would put evidence in the hands of a huge number of people to bolster her case. But, unlike you seem to believe, I have found no reason to think that there is something that she has actually written.

I put this search into Google: ("sophia stewart" "the third eye"), and found http://SophiaStewart.unn13.com/. This is a webpage at a site that is DEVOTED to her cause.

Go there, click on "Excerpts 'The Third Eye'" and tell me what any actual literary excerpts you find there.

Then click on the "Sophia Stewart-Warner Brothers Conspiracy" link and tell me the message you find instead of anything about the "conspiracy."

And click on the link to "Court Documents" and tell me what the message there is.

[Bisola Marignay]

Actually, William, I did not advise soft-pedaling of criticism. My point was directed to the structure of your argument, which seems to emphatically dismiss the possibility of awry circumstances in Sophia’s case. Your argument is implicitly based on the assertion that a certain order exist for the unfolding of events in situations of this type, and if that order is not demonstrated, then all claims are negated. As we know, in life, many different unfoldings of situations abound. So, yes, it is possible that Sophia’s attorneys turned their backs on the potential of making millions from her case when faced with an actual immediate payoff of millions from the plaintiffs. Why did she miss one of the hearings? Who knows? There are many possible intervening circumstances.

But the context, Hollywood as a place where rip offs are normalized, situated in a society where Black people are ripped off everywhere, everyday gives us good cause to hold on more tenaciously to Sophia’s claim than to denials from the status quo. And that is a very rational attitude.

You said, “ the first movie seemed to me to be Africentrically outside of the Eurocentric mainstream.” I saw that too. We can see when our culture is represented as most other people can see theirs, but we see our culture especially well because reflecting on it is part of the culture. That is, we have awareness or a meta perspective of it as we function within it. The double consciousness that Du Bois expounded is useful in thinking about this aspect of our cultural engagement. However, trying to explain that to someone outside the culture is like trying to point to the practice of subtle racism that resides in small details and felt experience.

Yes, just the idea of the Matrix being a rip off of Sophia’s work raises our ire. Yes, we are invested emotionally, because we know the likelihood of it being true. Thus, what has been expressed in these posts is not dishonest thought, but righteous anger. And rather than delusion, it is a belief that we are dealing with that is held to be true because it is expedient to do so given the circumstances of our lives.

But why the hard press attitude toward Sophia? Does she deserve the whip because she brought the case out and has fell down in certain areas? I mean, why is it that claims of her “not being wrapped too tight” can go forward without evidence, as gossip, when lack of evidence is the basis for dismissing the creditability of her claim? What about those whom she has implicated? I haven't seen anything about their reputations, mental status, or their past histories related to greed.

Nonetheless, I agree that we must inform our outrage with facts, and refer back to the proposal in my post; can we get a copy of the Third Eye, read it, then decide rather than continuing on empty? So, Jill, in light of the requirement to compare the two productions, even though we want the best outcome for Sophia, what she has to say is not sufficient or of interest to the resolution of this controversy. We have seen the Matrix; now, we need to read the Third Eye. Can you ask Sophia where we can get a copy or at least excerpts?

Meanwhile, we have to deal with the film, Avatar, and the European superiority it promotes. For an excellent analysis and evaluation of the film relative to its assertion of European superiority check out the following:

Avatar: An Extension of White Supremacy
http://www.motionbox.com/videos/a697d4b21818e6c529

As read by the author Frederick Alexander Meade

[William Dorsey]

Yes, I do look for a certain order to things. If you make a claim based on evidence, I would like to see the evidence. Nearly a decade of claiming, while providing no support, is what I am reacting to. There is no "pass" for being black, a woman or whatever.

I am curious why you do not appear to see a problem in the long-term lack of evidence. Actions speak much more loudly than words, in my view.

The prophylactic against white supremacy is knowledge of black humanity, culturally, historically, and on a daily basis. People who are emotionally mature recognize and properly discount attacks on their humanity. Pulling coattails, making people aware of the insidious implications of mythical presentations such as in "Avatar," is about all the time I want to spend on jumping up and down about white supremacy.

[Stanley Glenn Lewis]

And while we are on the subject of Avatar...
The special effects...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-NBCuW7QWY
The story...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-NBCuW7QWY
and the Title...http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/a/poul-anderson/avatar.htm

were taken by the same James Cameron that Sophia accuses of theft of The Terminator and cut and pasted into a nomination for the Oscar...Billions in sales be damned...I'm sure we are going to hear of more lawsuits...

[Stanley Glenn Lewis]

On 11th day of August, 2009,IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DIVISION, DISTRICT OF UTAH MAGISTRATE JUDGE BROOKE C. WELLS ruled that in the SOPHIA STEWART,Plaintiff vs.MICHAEL T. STOLLER, JONATHANLUBELL, DEAN WEBB, GARY BROWNand JOHN DOES I through X,Defendants, Case # Civil No. 2:07-cv-00552,
The defendant's motion to dismiss was denied and that all evidence that Ms. Stewart had presented would be entered into the Federal Court. This includes evidence from the United States Library of Congress Copyright Office, indicating that her 1981 Copyright of the materials identified as The Third Eye, superseded the copyright of The Terminator by more than a year. A complete copy of the legal decision is posted here. http://www.blogcatalog.com/blog/the-divine-oracle-sophia/d1a81213e2...

As the Black Panthers used to say "No condemnation without investigation".
Second. Sophia had paid $50,000.00 to a team of Harvard and Prineston educated lawyers to handle her case. What reason would she have for not showing up for her "Day In Court", which is the reason the case was thrown out? Her lawyers told her she didn't need to show up. and then proceeded to sell her out by not entering the evidence she gave them of proof of the theft , which is why the Utah lawsuit against them was filed. Why did they sell her out when they stood to make Millions as their percentage of the case? Simple...they were paid $50,000.00 and would not have received a portion of the award. Maybe a few million was worth their careers and reputations...and possibly jail time...Maybe they thought because she was a Black Paralegal and they were highly paid lawyers, she didn't stand a chance...(male egos can think like that sometimes)They approached her so maybe they took the 50, knowing they would get much more for sabotaging her case. The real reasons I don't know, but I do know they failed to file the evidence they had...and no lawyers at that level could make such a "mistake". You said "Naturally, the item was jumped on by the black media without checking out the facts". Looks like you (and you are part of Black Media aren't you?) did the same thing...
And on the subject of James Cameron...here is a news worthy item that you might want to follow up on.
It seems that he Cut and Pasted his way to an Oscar nomination...and here is the "Proof". Here is where the story came from ...http://albotas.com/2009/12/james-camerons-avatar-ripped-from-the-pa...

Here is where some of the scenes and special effects came from...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-NBCuW7QWY

And here is where the Title came from...http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/a/poul-anderson/avatar.htm

What Sophia has done for Writer and Film makers, particularly those of Color, is pull the covers off the way Hollywood steals the Credits and Money of those they rip off. They hide the evidence in plain sight. In the case of The Terminator, the first minute and forty three seconds of the movie is nowhere in the Cameron script...but it reads exactly to the materials Sophia registered as The Third Eye. Her epic was used as the basis for both franchises...all from the same source material. And if you as the writer don't happen to catch that movie, you can go for years without knowing you were ripped off...which is why the law states a statute of limitations AFTER YOU FIRST HAD AWARENESS OF THE THEFT. So to recap...Sophia Stewart answered an ad for scripts to be made into Sci Fi movies posted by the Wachowski Brothers. She sent in her nine volume work. Cameron made The Terminator. They made The Matrix. She didn't see The Terminator but did see The Matrix and saw it to be from the writings she had sent them. She notified them, they denied, she contacted the FBI (remember, she challenged to enter college from the 9th grade and was allow in. She graduated with a major in Journalism and a double minor in Law and Psychology, then did graduate work at USC in Film, so with that background,she dotted her I's and Crossed her T's all along the way..) It was the FBI that after a two year investigation, told her that her work was the basis of The Matrix and The Terminator...enough said. If you are really interested in the truth, I'm sure you can take it from here...but believe me...when it breaks? This is going to be one of the biggest stories of 2010.
Enough said...