Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 1 of 41 Page ID #:1
`
`
`
`ANDERSON YEH PC
` Edward M. Anderson (STATE BAR NO. 198183)
`edward@andersonyehlaw.com
` Regina Yeh (STATE BAR NO. 266019)
`regina@andersonyehlaw.com
`1055 E. Colorado Blvd. Ste 500
`Pasadena, California 91106
`Telephone: (626) 204-4092 Facsimile: (888) 744-0317
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`ALCON ENTERTAINMENT, LLC
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION
`
` CASE NO.
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR:
`
`1) DIRECT COPYRIGHT
`INFRINGEMENT;
`
`2) VICARIOUS COPYRIGHT
`INFRINGEMENT;
`
`3) CONTRIBUTORY
`COPYRIGHT
`INFRINGEMENT;
`
`AND
`
`4) FALSE ENDORSEMENT IN
`VIOLATION OF 15 U.S.C. §
`1125(a)(1)(A)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`ALCON ENTERTAINMENT, LLC,
`a Delaware Limited Liability
`Company,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TESLA, INC., a Texas Corporation;
`ELON MUSK, an individual;
`WARNER BROS. DISCOVERY,
`INC., a Delaware Corporation;
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 2 of 41 Page ID #:2
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Alcon Entertainment, LLC (“Plaintiff” or “Alcon”), through its
`attorneys, hereby alleges its Complaint against defendants Tesla, Inc. (“Tesla”),
`Elon Musk (“Musk”), and Warner Bros. Discovery, Inc. (“WBDI”) (collectively,
`“Defendants” and each separately a “Defendant”):
`SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
`1.
`The Court has federal question subject matter jurisdiction per 15
`U.S.C. § 1121(a), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) and (b), and on the grounds that
`this is a civil action arising under the laws of the United States. Plaintiff seeks
`relief under the Copyright Act of 1976, as amended, 17 U.S.C. §§ 101, et al., and
`the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1125(a)(1)(A), in interstate commerce.
`SUMMARY OF DISPUTE
`2.
`Defendants requested permission to use an iconic still image (Exhibit
`A) from Alcon’s “Blade Runner 2049” motion picture (“BR2049” or the “Picture”)
`to promote Tesla’s new fully autonomous cybercab in an October 10, 2024 event
`that was livestreamed worldwide from WBDI’s Burbank, California studio lot.
`Alcon refused all permissions and adamantly objected to Defendants suggesting
`any affiliation between BR2049 and Tesla, Musk or any Musk-owned company.
`Defendants then used an apparently AI-generated faked image to do it all anyway.
`3.
`Defendants apparently fed the Exhibit A Image, and similarly iconic
`images from the same visual sequence at BR2049’s dramatic core (Exhibit B), into
`an AI-driven image generator, and then directed the AI to make a lightly stylized
`fake screen still from BR2049 (Exhibit C). Defendants then made this faked image
`the second presentation slide of the event, displaying it full screen on the
`livestream feed for 11 seconds (a marketing and advertising eternity) at the opening
`of Musk’s cybercab sales pitch remarks.
`4.
`During those 11 seconds, Musk tried awkwardly to explain why he
`was showing the audience a picture of BR2049 when he was supposed to be talking
`about his new product. He really had no credible reason. Musk ostensibly invited
`- 2 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 3 of 41 Page ID #:3
`
`
`
`the global audience to think about the cybercab’s possibilities in juxtaposition to
`BR2049’s fictional future. But it all exuded an odor of thinly contrived excuse to
`link Tesla’s cybercab to strong Hollywood brands at a time when Tesla and Musk
`are on the outs with Hollywood.1 Which of course is exactly what it was.
`5.
`It was hardly coincidental that the only specific Hollywood film which
`Musk actually discussed to pitch his new, fully autonomous, AI-driven cybercab
`was BR2049 – a film which just happens to feature a strikingly-designed,
`artificially intelligent, fully autonomous car throughout the story. Especially where
`Defendants had asked Alcon’s permission to use BR2049 and been so firmly
`refused, this was clearly all a bad faith and intentionally malicious gambit by
`Defendants to make the otherwise stilted and stiff content of the joint WBDI-Tesla
`event more attractive to the global audience and to misappropriate BR2049’s brand
`to help sell Teslas.
`6.
`The financial magnitude of the misappropriation here was substantial.
`Alcon has spent decades and hundreds of millions of dollars building the BR2049
`brand into the famous mark that it now is. Prior actual BR2049 contracts linking
`automotive brands to the Picture have had dollar price tags in the eight figures.
`The financial stakes and complexity of BR2049 automotive brand affiliations are
`especially high at the immediate moment. Alcon is in talks with other automotive
`brands for partnerships on Alcon’s BR2049-based Blade Runner 2099 television
`series currently in production, and Defendants’ conduct is likely to cause confusion
`among Alcon’s potential brand partner customers.
`///
`
`
`1 See, e.g., Brett Berk, “Hollywood Can’t Ditch Its Tesla’s Fast Enough: ‘They’re
`Destroying Their Leases and Walking Away,’” The Hollywood Reporter, September
`20, 2024, https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-news/tesla-
`robotaxi-warner-bros-reveal-hollywood-rejection-elon-musk-1236007945/.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`- 3 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 4 of 41 Page ID #:4
`
`
`
`7.
`Beyond these more ordinary commercial issues, there is the
`problematic Musk himself. Any prudent brand considering any Tesla partnership
`has to take Musk’s massively amplified, highly politicized, capricious and arbitrary
`behavior, which sometimes veers into hate speech, into account. If, as here, a
`company or its principals do not actually agree with Musk’s extreme political and
`social views, then a potential brand affiliation with Tesla is even more issue-
`fraught. Alcon did not want BR2049 to be affiliated with Musk, Tesla, or any
`Musk company, for all of these reasons.
`8.
`Now BR2049 unfortunately and falsely is so affiliated, and far beyond
`the 11 seconds of presentation time at the cybercab live event. The event’s
`worldwide livestream X feed, including Musk’s forced BR2049-laced opening, was
`re-tweeted or re-posted by Tesla, Musk, X and others thousands of times, with
`millions of total views. The false affiliation between BR2049 and Tesla is
`irreparably entangled in the global media tapestry, all as Defendants knew would
`inevitably happen, and amplifying the damage and confusion risks.
`9.
`This was and is all highly offensive to Alcon’s right to commercial
`and cultural self-determination. It was also a massive economic theft. Based on
`prior BR2049 automotive brand affiliation contracts and the nature and scope of
`the use here, the fair market value of the brand affiliation goodwill that Defendants
`stole is at least in the six figures and possibly much higher. Beyond Alcon’s lost
`fees for the unauthorized association, Defendants muddied the waters for Alcon’s
`in-progress exploration of automotive brand partnerships for the upcoming
`BR2049-based Blade Runner 2099 television series.
`10. Alcon now seeks relief under the United States Copyright Act and the
`Lanham Act, for damages and to pry Musk and his co-Defendants away from
`Alcon’s BR2049 brand and goodwill.
`///
`///
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`- 4 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 5 of 41 Page ID #:5
`
`
`
`PERSONAL JURISDICTION OVER DEFENDANTS
`11. Per Rule 4(k)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Court
`has personal jurisdiction over any defendant who is subject to the jurisdiction of
`any California court of general jurisdiction. California’s long arm statute, Cal.
`Code Civ. Pro. § 410.10, allows courts in the state to exercise personal jurisdiction
`over parties to the full extent permissible under the United States Constitution.
`Personal jurisdiction over the Defendants here is thus proper if it comports with
`due process. It does, including for the following reasons.
`Personal Jurisdiction Over Tesla
`12. General Personal Jurisdiction: The Court has general or unlimited
`personal jurisdiction over Tesla. Tesla is currently incorporated under the laws of
`the State of Texas and its principal corporate office or headquarters is in Austin,
`Texas and has been since about December 2021. However, California was Tesla’s
`original principal corporate office home state, from Tesla’s inception in about 2003
`until the December 2021 move to Texas. Tesla still maintains continuous and
`systematic contacts with California, including continuing to operate at least two
`major manufacturing plants in the state.
`13. Specific Personal Jurisdiction: Additionally and/or in the alternative,
`the Court has specific or limited personal jurisdiction over Tesla. Alcon’s claims
`arise out of Tesla’s purposeful availment of the rights, privileges, and protections
`of doing business in California, and also arise out of Tesla’s commission of tortious
`activity in California and purposeful direction of tortious conduct toward the forum
`state. Tesla committed the acts of infringement alleged herein, or substantial
`portions of them, in preparation for and during the course of the October 10, 2024
`cybercab product reveal event at WBDI’s Burbank, California studio lot. The
`event was personally conducted by Musk who is Tesla’s founder, principal and
`Chief Executive Officer. Tesla’s acts of copyright infringement and violations of
`the Lanham Act all constituted torts directed toward Alcon, a forum resident, and
`- 5 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 6 of 41 Page ID #:6
`
`
`
`relate to the motion picture industry, which is of compelling interest to the forum
`state. Exercise of personal jurisdiction over Tesla also is reasonable and fair.
`Personal Jurisdiction Over Musk
`14. The Court has at least specific or limited personal jurisdiction over
`Musk as an individual. Plaintiff’s claims against him arise out of his acts of
`purposeful availment of the benefits and privileges of conducting activities in
`California, including where he personally conducted the event from the WBDI lot
`in Burbank, California. Plaintiff’s claims also arise out of Musk’s commission of
`tortious acts while physically present in the forum state. His acts also constituted
`purposeful direction of tortious conduct to the forum, all for the same specific facts
`and reasons as described above regarding Tesla personal jurisdiction. Exercise of
`personal jurisdiction over Musk as an individual also is reasonable and fair. At any
`given time depending on stock market fluctuations, Musk is reportedly the richest
`man in the world and has ample resources to defend himself in California court.
`Personal Jurisdiction Over WBDI
`15. The Court has general or unlimited personal jurisdiction over WBDI.
`WBDI is incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware and its principal
`corporate office or headquarters is in New York. However, WBDI has continuous
`and systematic contacts with California, including owning and operating one of
`Hollywood’s oldest major motion picture and television studios including the
`Warner Bros. Studios lot in Burbank, California.
`16. Additionally and/or in the alternative, the Court has specific or limited
`personal jurisdiction over WBDI. Alcon’s claims arise out of WBDI’s purposeful
`availment of the rights, privileges, and protections of doing business in California.
`They also arise out of WBDI’s commission of tortious activity in California and
`purposeful direction of tortious conduct toward the forum state. WBDI’s
`involvement in acts of copyright infringement and violations of the Lanham Act all
`constituted torts directed toward Alcon, a forum resident. They all relate to the
`- 6 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 7 of 41 Page ID #:7
`
`
`
`motion picture industry, an industry in which the forum state has a compelling
`interest. Exercise of personal jurisdiction over WBDI also is reasonable and fair.
`VENUE
`28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) Venue as to all Defendants
`17. Venue is proper as to all Defendants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
`1391(b)(2), because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to
`Alcon’s claims occurred, or a substantial part of the property that is the subject of
`the action is situated, within this judicial district. The infringed property in
`question includes Alcon’s copyright in BR2049 and ownership of BR2049 marks
`and goodwill, which property is all located within this district for venue purposes,
`where Alcon has its corporate headquarters in Los Angeles, California.
`Additional Venue Bases
`18. Venue also is proper as to WBDI and Tesla pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
`1400(a) and 1391(d). For venue purposes, Tesla and WBDI each reside in or may
`be found within this district. Tesla and WBDI each have continuous and
`systematic contacts with the forum state and this district specifically, including
`sufficient contacts with this district to establish personal jurisdiction in this district,
`if this district were treated as a separate state.
`PARTIES
`Plaintiff
`19. Alcon is an independent motion picture and television studio whose
`products are distributed worldwide. Alcon is a limited liability company organized
`under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business at
`10390 Santa Monica Blvd., #250, Los Angeles, California 90025.
`20. Alcon produced BR2049 and owns the BR2049 copyright and the
`BR2049 marks and brand at issue in this action. Alcon has produced more than
`thirty other major motion pictures, including “The Blind Side” (which won the
`2009 Academy Award for Best Actress), the “Dolphin Tale” series, the “Sisterhood
`- 7 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 8 of 41 Page ID #:8
`
`
`
`of the Traveling Pants” series, “Book of Eli,” “P.S. I Love You,” “My Dog Skip,”
`“Prisoners,” and “The Garfield Movie.” Alcon also produces television, including
`the critically acclaimed television series The Expanse. Alcon is currently in
`production on a “Blade Runner 2049” sequel or spinoff television series entitled
`Blade Runner 2099.
`
`Defendants
`21. Tesla: Tesla is a well-known developer and manufacturer of electric
`automobiles. Some of Tesla’s automobile products are marketed as partially or
`fully autonomous. The idea of AI-controlled or otherwise autonomous automobiles
`is a Tesla brand focus.
`22. Musk: Musk is Tesla’s founder, largest shareholder and Chief
`Executive Officer. In addition to owning and operating Tesla, he also owns and
`operates the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) and the rocket and satellite
`company SpaceX, among other ventures. Musk has become an increasingly vocal,
`overtly political, highly polarizing figure globally, and especially in Hollywood.
`23. WBDI: WBDI is one of the largest entertainment conglomerates in the
`world. It owns the Warner Bros. Studios lot in Burbank, California. WBDI is
`currently run by its Chief Executive Officer, David Zaslav, a man who is both
`friendly with Musk and controversial in Hollywood in his own right.
`FACTS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION
`The Infringed Work And Brand
`24. Alcon is the owner and, as to all rights at issue herein, the exclusive
`copyright holder, of the BR2049 motion picture. The Picture is registered with the
`United States Copyright Office under registration number PA0002056792 and has
`been since October 6, 2017. The images from BR2049 shown in Exhibits A and B
`are from an iconic visual sequence at the dramatic core of the Picture. In the
`copyright context, they are qualitatively significant to the Picture and they qualify
`///
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`- 8 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 9 of 41 Page ID #:9
`
`
`
`as being at the “heart of the work.” They also have secondary meaning in the
`Lanham Act context, all as discussed below.
`25. The Picture tells the story of the main character “K” (played by Ryan
`Gosling). K is an artificially intelligent android or replicant pursuing the possible
`existence of a wholly or partially replicant child conceived by, and born to, a
`replicant mother, a phenomenon which would re-order the entire societal
`relationship between humans and their artificially intelligent replicant creations.
`K’s trench coat or “duster” is the predominant feature of his wardrobe or costume.
`Throughout the Picture, K travels in, and is assisted by, his artificially intelligent,
`quasi-sentient flying car, or “spinner,” which is capable of autonomous action.
`26. The Exhibit A and B images are from among the most memorable
`sequences in the Picture: K’s arrival in, and exploration of, the orange-colored
`ruins of the Picture’s abandoned Las Vegas, rendered uninhabitable by a dirty
`nuclear device many years prior to the story’s timeframe. The sequence follows K
`as he leaves the spinner and walks in his trench coat or “duster” toward and
`through the misty orange urban desert ruins, often viewed by the camera from
`behind or in silhouette. The sequence leads up to and forebodes the Picture’s
`dramatic apogee: K’s encounter with his predecessor Deckard (Harrison Ford)
`from the original 1982 “Blade Runner” motion picture (the “1982 Picture”).
`27. The image attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by
`reference is a still image from the above sequence. It is an image positioned from
`behind K, with his close-cropped hair, garbed in his distinctive trench coat or
`“duster,” as he stands next to his spinner, facing away from the camera to survey
`the devastated orange-light-bathed Las Vegas cityscape (“Exhibit A Image”). In
`the Exhibit A Image, K is surveying the ruins as he prepares to set out on the walk
`through them that will lead him to the long-lost and mysterious Deckard – the most
`highly anticipated encounter in the Picture.
`///
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`- 9 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 10 of 41 Page ID #:10
`
`
`
`28. The images attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by
`reference are still images from K’s walk through the ruins to encounter Deckard
`(“Exhibit B Images”).
`29.
`“Blade Runner 2049,” and the words “Blade Runner” in contexts that
`refer to or include BR2049 (such as, for example, the words “Blade Runner” not
`followed by the number “2049,” but alongside iconic images from BR2049, or
`other callouts to specific scenes or elements of BR2049), the Exhibit A Image, and
`the Exhibit B Images, all have secondary meaning within the meaning of the
`Lanham Act, at the level of famous marks.
`30. They have achieved that status not merely accidentally, but because of
`Alcon’s extensive and expensive efforts. Beginning no later than 2011 and on a
`continuing basis ever since, Alcon expended and continues to expend vast
`resources, in excess of $200 million to date, from original acquisition of relevant
`underlying rights, to development, production, marketing, and distribution of
`BR2049, to ongoing brand development and active policing of infringements, to
`development, production and distribution of numerous derivative works, including
`without limitation television series, comic books, and video games.
`31. The Picture was theatrically released globally on a day-and-date basis
`in October 2017. It received an 89% positive audience reaction on well-known
`film review site Rotten Tomatoes. Among numerous other awards, BR2049 was
`nominated for five Academy Awards, and it won two: Best Cinematography and
`Best Visual Effects. IGN gaming website named BR2049 the Best Movie of the
`Year for 2017, the Golden Tomato Awards named it the Best Sci-Fi/Fantasy Movie
`of 2017, and the 2018 Saturn Awards named it the Best Science Fiction film.
`BR2049 is regularly identified as one of the best science fiction movies of all time
`on lists of such movies generated by journalists, critics, and consumers.
`32. Alcon’s efforts thus have generated robust consumer goodwill and
`brand recognition for BR2049 and its elements, specifically including the Exhibit
`- 10 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 11 of 41 Page ID #:11
`
`
`
`A Image and the Exhibit B Images in the Lanham Act context. Both the Exhibit A
`Image and the Exhibit B Images have been, and still are, prominently used by
`Alcon in the marketing, promotion and publicity of BR2049.
`33. The Exhibit A Image was the image used as the lead photo for
`numerous marketing, promotional and publicity press pieces about the Picture
`preceding its October 2017 initial theatrical release. It is still to this day the image
`that appears as the cover image to the official BR2049 marketing and promotional
`trailer as that trailer appears on YouTube. It is the back cover image for The Art
`and Soul of Blade Runner 2049, the coffee table book celebrating the Picture’s
`visual design elements. It thus is one of the most iconic images from the Picture,
`and also one of the most commercially significant in a marketing sense. It
`immediately evokes BR2049 and everything the Picture stands for, without any
`words or other references. It is the image which Defendants specifically requested
`to use (and were refused by Alcon), as discussed further, infra.
`34.
`Images from BR2049’s same Las Vegas sequence also have been, and
`still are, used by Alcon for marketing, promotion and publicity for the Picture. As
`just one example, the front cover of the same The Art and Soul of Blade Runner
`2049 coffee table book about the Picture is from Exhibit B Images set (K’s duster-
`garbed silhouette moving alone through misty orange-lit emptiness). Exhibit B
`Images and similar images from the same sequence in the Picture consistently
`appear at, or near, the top of search engine queries about the Picture. Exhibit B
`Images and those like them from the Las Vegas sequence -- of a silhouetted trench
`coat-wearing man moving through a misty orange-colored ruinous urban desert
`landscape -- are immediately evocative of BR2049, without any other cues or
`references required.
`35. The Picture and its brand (including specifically the words “Blade
`Runner” even without the year “2049,” when used in contexts that evoke BR2049
`distinct from the 1982 Picture, and specifically including the Exhibit A Image and
`- 11 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 12 of 41 Page ID #:12
`
`
`
`Exhibit B Images) all have especially high resonance as to artificial intelligence,
`advanced automotive technology, and the combination of the two. K’s spinner has
`been recognized culturally as one of the most famous vehicles in motion picture
`history. For example, the Petersen Automotive Museum in Los Angeles featured
`one of the full-scale prop models of K’s spinner prominently in the museum’s
`extended run of its “Hollywood Dream Machines: Vehicles of Science Fiction and
`Fantasy” special exhibit which ran from 2019 to 2020. The BR2049 K spinner was
`one of only three vehicles selected to be on the marketing one-sheet poster for the
`Petersen exhibit, along with the time-traveling DeLorean from the “Back to the
`Future” movies and a light cycle from “Tron: Legacy.”
`36. Numerous major automotive brands expressed substantial interest in a
`co-promotion brand partnership with Alcon on BR2049 prior to the Picture’s initial
`theatrical release. K’s spinner as it appears in BR2049 is in fact branded under a
`major global automotive brand. The contract price for that theatrical release co-
`promotion was well into the eight figures.
`37. BR2049 is a commercially living property, with an ongoing active
`market for automotive brand partnerships in particular. For instance, as already
`mentioned, Alcon is currently in production on Blade Runner 2099, a BR2049-
`derived sequel or spin-off television series and Alcon is currently actively in the
`process of engaging with automotive brands for brand partnerships on that project.
`The October 10, 2024 Tesla Marketing Event and Alcon’s Express Denial of
`Defendants’ License Requests and Clear Objections to Any Affiliation
`38. Some of what happened among the Defendants is not yet known to
`Plaintiff, and likely will not be known until and unless Plaintiff is allowed
`discovery. Based on news reports, the nature of the event, and industry custom and
`practice with respect to studio lot events, and partial information provided by
`WBDI agents or representatives, Plaintiff makes the allegations in this paragraph
`38 on information and belief and subject to the need for discovery: At some point
`- 12 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 13 of 41 Page ID #:13
`
`
`
`prior to October 10, 2024, Tesla and WBDI entered into a contractual agreement,
`the details of which are unknown to Alcon, but the essence of which necessarily
`included that WBDI would lease or license or otherwise provide studio lot space,
`lot access, infrastructure support and other resources to Tesla for the October 10,
`2024 cybercab event and preparations leading up to it. The event involved
`substantial WBDI resources and lot access. For example, pre-event preparations
`were significant and started weeks or months prior, including Tesla vehicles
`repeatedly driving the studio lot to map it beforehand, so that about fifty fully
`autonomous Tesla cars could navigate the lot carrying Musk and event attendees on
`fully driverless rides as part of the event. The contract necessarily would have
`required substantial financial compensation to be paid by Tesla to WBDI, in at
`least the high six figures and possibly in seven figures.
`39. Based on what actually happened at the event and the communications
`from WBDI agents and representatives to Alcon on the day of the event, as well as
`the absence of any substantial brand affiliation negotiation communications to
`Alcon at earlier dates or at all, Alcon is informed and believes and subject to the
`need for discovery thereon makes the allegations in this paragraph 39: The Tesla-
`WBDI event contract (or another associated contract) included a promotional
`element or elements, whereby WBDI allowed or possibly even required Tesla
`expressly to affiliate the cybercab with one or more motion pictures from WBDI’s
`motion picture library, or the motion picture library of WBDI’s subsidiary Warner
`Bros. Pictures, a division of WB Studio Enterprises Inc. (“Warner Bros. Pictures”).
`40. Warner Bros. Pictures was Alcon’s domestic distributor for the 2017
`theatrical release of BR2049 and still has some domestic distribution rights, but not
`without limitations and restrictions. Warner Bros. Pictures has some limited and
`ongoing “clip licensing” rights in the domestic market only, and not at all for a
`livestream television feed. Moreover, neither Warner Bros. Pictures nor any other
`WBDI entity owns the copyright in BR2049 or any of the Picture’s marks or
`- 13 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 14 of 41 Page ID #:14
`
`
`
`goodwill. No WBDI entity has or ever had any non-domestic rights or permissions
`for the Picture. Thus, neither Warner Bros. Pictures nor any other WBDI entity has
`or ever had sufficient rights to allow Tesla to exploit BR2049 or any of its
`elements, marks or goodwill in connection with the globally livestreamed cybercab
`reveal event.
`41. Warner Bros. Pictures has a longstanding course of dealing with
`Alcon generally and on BR2049 specifically. Pursuant at least to that course of
`dealing, and custom and practice in the industry, Warner Bros. Pictures is required
`to, expected by Alcon to, and in fact actually does consult with Alcon and seek
`Alcon’s approval prior to brand affiliation licensing of any BR2049 elements for,
`inter alia, a substantial, high-profile, and highly commercial brand affiliation,
`especially if the affiliation is potentially controversial or politically charged, and
`even if for only the domestic market.
`42. Neither Warner Bros. Pictures nor any other WBDI entity or
`representative ever communicated with Alcon at all about any potentially
`contemplated BR2049 brand affiliation with the Tesla cybercab or the event.
`(Even the communications that occurred from WBDI’s representative to Alcon on
`the day of the event were disingenuously in the context of a purported relatively
`routine “clip license” request, never as the much more significant brand affiliation
`really at issue.) That failure is inconsistent with the above long-standing course of
`dealing, and with custom and practice in the industry.
`43. Based on what actually happened at the event and the communications
`to Alcon from WBDI representatives on the day of the event and since, as well as
`the absence of certain communications to Alcon at earlier dates or at all, Alcon is
`informed and believes and, subject to the need for discovery, makes the allegations
`in this paragraph 43: Musk communicated to WBDI at some point in the event
`planning process, that Musk specifically wanted to associate the cybercab and
`Tesla with BR2049. Musk believed (incorrectly) that BR2049 was part of the
`- 14 -
`COMPLAINT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-09033 Document 1 Filed 10/21/24 Page 15 of 41 Page ID #:15
`
`
`
`relevant WBDI motion picture library subject to the Tesla-WBDI event agreement,
`or otherwise that WBDI could grant Tesla worldwide BR2049 exploitation rights
`to affiliate BR2049 with the cybercab during the event. Among other BR2049
`brand affiliation rights, Tesla and Musk asked WBDI for specific permission and
`rights to use the Exhibit A Image. The specific Tesla employees, contractors or
`agents tasked with executing on these issues included David Adametz (“Adametz”)
`(a video production marketing executive at Tesla) and Shara Lili (“Lili”), a
`Manager of Video Content for Tesla (also a video production marketing executive
`at Tesla). One or both of Adametz and Lili were in direct contact with WBDI
`executives about the BR2049 brand affiliation, and one or both of Adametz and
`Lili were also in direct or indirect contact with Musk about it, too.
`44. Based on similarly-founded information and belief, and subject to the
`need for discovery, Alcon further makes the allegations in this paragraph 44: At the
`request of one or all of the Defendants (possibly made by Adametz or Lili on
`behalf of Tesla and Musk), WBDI’s shared services rights clearance department
`commenced clearance checks on the planned BR2049 brand inclusion in the
`October 10, 2024 cybercab event.2 For reasons not yet fully known to Alcon,
`WBDI’s shared services rights clearance department commenced (incorrectly) to
`clear the use as only involving a need for a “clip license” (typically a relatively
`
`
`2 Shared services departments at Hollywood studios and their affiliated larger
`corporate conglomerates have personnel (often legal, financial, accounting, or
`human resources professionals) who may be ostensibly employed by, receive their
`paychecks from, and have titles only with, a single corporate entity in the larger
`conglomerate, but who in fact render services upon request or direction to a range of
`entities within the conglomerate. Here, Plaintiff is informed and believes and on
`that basis alleges that the WBDI shared services licensing department personnel
`involved in this matter included an individua