⚖️ Quentin Tarantino sued Gawker for $1M+, then Miramax sued him

Miramax sued Tarantino over Pulp Fiction NFTs and settled in 2022. He dropped his Gawker suit, THR says; Gawker's reply isn't on record. 📌

By , editor at large · Desk editor Gustavs Ērkšķis-Kreicbergs · · 3 min read

Quentin TarantinoFILEDPhoto: Gage Skidmore · CC BY-SA 3.0

Photo: Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons. Desaturated and cropped by MrScandal.

What we know

  • Per the Hindustan Times, citing People, Quentin Tarantino says in a book released November 10 that he fired Isabelle Huppert and Mélanie Laurent from Inglourious Basterds; Laurent was brought back.
  • Per CBC News, Tarantino sued Gawker Media in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles on Jan. 27, 2014, for copyright infringement over links to his leaked Hateful Eight script, seeking unspecified damages of more than $1 million.
  • The Hollywood Reporter reported in 2016 that Tarantino dropped the Gawker suit soon after an April 2014 live reading of the script.
  • Per an AFP report, Miramax sued Tarantino for breach of contract in November 2021 over his planned Pulp Fiction NFT auctions.
  • Variety reported that the Miramax case settled in September 2022, after the first NFT sold for a reported $1.1 million and the other six auctions were canceled.

Quentin Tarantino is explaining himself again. In Jay Glennie's book on the making of Inglourious Basterds, released November 10, he says he fired Isabelle Huppert after she missed the table read amid contract problems, and fired Mélanie Laurent after a table read he called terrible, according to the Hindustan Times, citing People. Laurent talked her way back in; Maggie Cheung replaced Huppert. Dismissing people is plainly routine for him. Suing them is the rarer sport, and the record shows two cases.

The timeline

01

January 2014: the script leaks, and Tarantino shelves The Hateful Eight

Tarantino told Deadline on Jan. 21, 2014 that he had given his first draft to six people and that it had leaked. He said he would publish it as a book instead of directing it next. He told Deadline he suspected an agent of one of three actors; Deadline reported that CAA, which represents Bruce Dern, vehemently denied it could have been the source.

See the receipt (opens in a new tab)
02

Jan. 27, 2014: Tarantino sues Gawker Media

CBC News reported that Tarantino filed a copyright infringement claim in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles against Gawker Media and the anonymous users of anonfiles.com. The claim followed a post on Gawker's Defamer site linking to the leaked script. He sought unspecified damages of more than $1 million and an injunction. The CBC report carries no response from Gawker Media.

See the receipt (opens in a new tab)

"Gawker Media has made a business of predatory journalism, violating people’s rights to make a buck. This time they went too far"

Tarantino's lawsuit, as quoted by CBC News
03

April 2014: a live reading, then the suit is dropped

In mid-April 2014 Tarantino staged a live reading of the script at the Ace Hotel in Los Angeles, a benefit for LACMA. The Hollywood Reporter says a packed house of 1,200, some of whom paid $200, gave it a standing ovation, and that soon after the event he dropped the lawsuit. The magazine also says the person who leaked the script remains unknown. The date and terms of the dismissal are not in the sources read.

See the receipt (opens in a new tab)
04

November 2021: Miramax sues over Pulp Fiction NFTs

According to a complaint filed on a Tuesday in Los Angeles and seen by AFP, Miramax sued Tarantino for breach of contract. He was auctioning script pages from seven scenes cut from the 1994 film, plus audio commentary. Miramax said it holds the rights, including to unused sections of the script. Tarantino refused to give up the project, saying he owns the rights to the script in written form.

See the receipt (opens in a new tab)

"Tarantino’s conduct has forced Miramax to bring this lawsuit against a valued collaborator in order to enforce, preserve, and protect its contractual and intellectual property rights"

Miramax's complaint, as quoted in the AFP report on Yahoo News
05

September 2022: settlement, after a reported $1.1M first sale

Variety reported that Tarantino went ahead with the first of seven planned auctions, which sold for a reported $1.1 million. The other six were canceled over 'extreme market volatility'. Miramax's lawyers told the court the case had settled, and a joint statement said both sides would 'put this matter behind them' and look forward to collaborating, including on possible NFTs. Variety's report gives no financial terms.

See the receipt (opens in a new tab)
CaseFiledClaimHow it ended
Tarantino v. Gawker MediaJan. 27, 2014Copyright infringement; more than $1M soughtDropped soon after April 2014 reading, per The Hollywood Reporter
Miramax v. TarantinoNovember 2021Breach of contract over Pulp Fiction NFTsSettled, per Variety, September 2022; terms not reported

There is a pairing here worth setting side by side. On Jan. 21, 2014 Tarantino told Deadline he liked that people eventually post and review his scripts online and 'wouldn't want it any other way'. He also told Deadline his anger was about it happening this early, after he had given the draft to only six people. Days later he sued the site that linked to it. Mr Scandal draws no conclusion; you may.

Earlier on file: Hulk Hogan won $140M against Gawker with Thiel's backing

The Quentin Tarantino file

Last entry Jan 21, 2014
  1. Reported

    Told Deadline he was shelving The Hateful Eight after its script leaked; CAA denied it was the source, Deadline reported. This story

  2. Reported

    Dropped the Gawker suit soon after the April 2014 live reading, per The Hollywood Reporter. This story

On file: The Quentin Tarantino file · The Gawker Media file · The Miramax file

The Ledger

On the record

  • Tarantino sued Gawker Media in January 2014 and dropped the case, and Miramax sued him in November 2021 and the two sides settled in September 2022, per the outlets above.

Still rumour

  • Gawker Media's response to the suit is not in the sources read, nor are the date and terms of the dismissal.
  • The Miramax settlement terms are not reported, and a filed dismissal is not confirmed in the documents read.

That's the record. The rest is rumour. - Mr Scandal

Next on the docket

More Celebrity

More from Mr Scandal, the MrScandal editor at large.