Forums

Pioneering Female Chess Champ Sues Netflix over "Queen's Gambit" Slight!!!

Sort:
Barney-Boondoggle

Well, IPG, This Reporter really doesn't think Netflix is about countersue an elder elite pioneer  female chess player for bringing a suit in which all the facts she has presented in her complaint are apparently accurate (with the notable exception of Anand's existence in 1968).

Logic dictates that this will never go to trial.  A settlement will be reached, for an undisclosed sum, and Netflix will mine this controversy to rock bottom for material in season two. 

Barney-Boondoggle

Prediction:  That last season one episode game "announcer" will be "fired" in season two and the truth about GM Nona will be corrected.

Then Harmon will square off in an invitational tournament against a less fictionalized version of GM Gaprindashvili, played by the actor who momentarily portrayed her (which will be great for her because she thought it was just a one-off).

Of course they bond, into an intense "chess-woman" friendship, the only two elite women chess professionals in a world of nerdy men...

lfPatriotGames
Barney-Boondoggle wrote:

Well, IPG, This Reporter really doesn't think Netflix is about countersue an elder elite pioneer  female chess player for bringing a suit in which all the facts she has presented in her complaint are apparently accurate (with the notable exception of Anand's existence in 1968).

Logic dictates that this will never go to trial.  A settlement will be reached, for an undisclosed sum, and Netflix will mine this controversy to rock bottom for material in season two. 

You are probably right, they probably won't countersue. But I would. 

I never even heard of Nona before and I don't remember the line in the movie. So if a chess player doesn't know who she is I don't think the average Queens Gambit viewer is going to know who she is, nor would they care. 

But after reading some comments here it turns out the line in the movie isn't all that far off. Apparently she DIDN"T play any men in certain big tournaments. So that makes the hurdle almost impossible to clear if you are the plaintiff. So it looks to me like someone is looking for a payday. So yes, just on principle, I would countersue. 

mpaetz

     "The Queen's Gambit" is fiction. The Netflix series is a dramatization of a 50-year old novel by Walter Tevis, so Nona is suing the wrong party. Libel and defamation laws are very lenient to the accused in such cases of minor distortions to serve a fictional purpose, especially if the "victim" is a public figure.

     GM Gaprindashvili was one of the strongest female players ever, but there is a bit of truth in the "defamatory" quotation. She (deservedly) got the GM title even though she achieved her norms in tournaments totaling 23 games rather than the required 24. FIDE felt that was only fair as she hadn't received invitations to any other sufficiently-strong tournaments because she was a woman. Even after becoming a GM she was rarely invited to play in strong tournaments so she mostly played women's tournaments because that was more remunerative.

Barney-Boondoggle
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Barney-Boondoggle wrote:

Well, IPG, This Reporter really doesn't think Netflix is about countersue an elder elite pioneer  female chess player for bringing a suit in which all the facts she has presented in her complaint are apparently accurate (with the notable exception of Anand's existence in 1968).

Logic dictates that this will never go to trial.  A settlement will be reached, for an undisclosed sum, and Netflix will mine this controversy to rock bottom for material in season two. 

You are probably right, they probably won't countersue. But I would. 

I never even heard of Nona before and I don't remember the line in the movie. So if a chess player doesn't know who she is I don't think the average Queens Gambit viewer is going to know who she is, nor would they care. 

But after reading some comments here it turns out the line in the movie isn't all that far off. Apparently she DIDN"T play any men in certain big tournaments. So that makes the hurdle almost impossible to clear if you are the plaintiff. So it looks to me like someone is looking for a payday. So yes, just on principle, I would countersue. 

 

This Reporter has highlighted where, in your comment, IMHO, is the crux of the problem with it's credibility.

DreamscapeHorizons

I thought movie makers could change whatever they wanted. There are many movies that are supposedly based on true stories (not this one I assume) but right in the advertisements they will say some characters and events have been changed, etc. So if they can change or make up whatever they want, even in sort of true stories, then it seems like they would/could do that in this one. Maybe if they had changed her name it would've been less irritating. 

Edit: Maybe if they would've changed her name to Gona Naprindashvili she would've been alright with it.

Barney-Boondoggle
mpaetz wrote:

     "The Queen's Gambit" is fiction. The Netflix series is a dramatization of a 50-year old novel by Walter Tevis, so Nona is suing the wrong party. Libel and defamation laws are very lenient to the accused in such cases of minor distortions to serve a fictional purpose, especially if the "victim" is a public figure.

     GM Gaprindashvili was one of the strongest female players ever, but there is a bit of truth in the "defamatory" quotation. She (deservedly) got the GM title even though she achieved her norms in tournaments totaling 23 games rather than the required 24. FIDE felt that was only fair as she hadn't received invitations to any other sufficiently-strong tournaments because she was a woman. Even after becoming a GM she was rarely invited to play in strong tournaments so she mostly played women's tournaments because that was more remunerative.

You are aware, though, that the line was changed from the corresponding line in the book, right?

That issue is specifically addressed in the body of the complaint.  The link is on this thread, and available *elsewhere* on the site.

dfgh123

Brad pitt beat up Bruce Lee in a movie.

lfPatriotGames
DreamscapeHorizons wrote:

I thought movie makers could change whatever they wanted. There are many movies that are supposedly based on true stories (not this one I assume) but right in the advertisements they will say some characters and events have been changed, etc. So if they can change or make up whatever they want, even in sort of true stories, then it seems like they would/could do that in this one. Maybe if they had changed her name it would've been less irritating. 

Yes. Which is part of the reason this lawsuit has little to no chance of going anywhere. But it does make a countersuit possible. 

lfPatriotGames
Barney-Boondoggle wrote:
mpaetz wrote:

     "The Queen's Gambit" is fiction. The Netflix series is a dramatization of a 50-year old novel by Walter Tevis, so Nona is suing the wrong party. Libel and defamation laws are very lenient to the accused in such cases of minor distortions to serve a fictional purpose, especially if the "victim" is a public figure.

     GM Gaprindashvili was one of the strongest female players ever, but there is a bit of truth in the "defamatory" quotation. She (deservedly) got the GM title even though she achieved her norms in tournaments totaling 23 games rather than the required 24. FIDE felt that was only fair as she hadn't received invitations to any other sufficiently-strong tournaments because she was a woman. Even after becoming a GM she was rarely invited to play in strong tournaments so she mostly played women's tournaments because that was more remunerative.

You are aware, though, that the line was changed from the corresponding line in the book, right?

That issue is specifically addressed in the body of the complaint.  The link is on this thread, and available *elsewhere* on the site.

Yes I am now aware that the line was changed from the book to the movie. Again I had no idea even after watching the movie who she was or what she did. Only after reading this article on this lawsuit do I now know who she is. 

So I wasn't talking about the line changing from the book to the movie. I was talking about the line actually not being completely false. There is actually some truth to it. From what I understand, correct me if I'm wrong, Nona did NOT play men in certain big tournaments. 

Barney-Boondoggle
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Barney-Boondoggle wrote:
mpaetz wrote:

     "The Queen's Gambit" is fiction. The Netflix series is a dramatization of a 50-year old novel by Walter Tevis, so Nona is suing the wrong party. Libel and defamation laws are very lenient to the accused in such cases of minor distortions to serve a fictional purpose, especially if the "victim" is a public figure.

     GM Gaprindashvili was one of the strongest female players ever, but there is a bit of truth in the "defamatory" quotation. She (deservedly) got the GM title even though she achieved her norms in tournaments totaling 23 games rather than the required 24. FIDE felt that was only fair as she hadn't received invitations to any other sufficiently-strong tournaments because she was a woman. Even after becoming a GM she was rarely invited to play in strong tournaments so she mostly played women's tournaments because that was more remunerative.

You are aware, though, that the line was changed from the corresponding line in the book, right?

That issue is specifically addressed in the body of the complaint.  The link is on this thread, and available *elsewhere* on the site.

Yes I am now aware that the line was changed from the book to the movie. Again I had no idea even after watching the movie who she was or what she did. Only after reading this article on this lawsuit do I now know who she is. 

So I wasn't talking about the line changing from the book to the movie. I was talking about the line actually not being completely false. There is actually some truth to it. From what I understand, correct me if I'm wrong, Nona did NOT play men in certain big tournaments. 

Wait, what?  This Reporter was not even quoting you or talking to you in that post, IPG.  Was quoting and responding to mpeatz. 

dfgh123

So you guys would be okay with some producer using your name and likeness and giving you an opposite personality to your real personality.

Barney-Boondoggle
dfgh123 wrote:

So you guys would be okay with some producer using your name and likeness and giving you an opposite personality to your real personality.

 

For $5 Million +, as sought in the complaint, most people probably would.

DreamscapeHorizons

Yeah, If I were paid 5 million they could say ANYTHING they wanted about me.

I'd take my embarrassed and sullied butt on a shopping spree for nice properties in multiple countries. Then relax on my house boat while being thoroughly embarrassed. 

dfgh123
Barney-Boondoggle wrote:
dfgh123 wrote:

So you guys would be okay with some producer using your name and likeness and giving you an opposite personality to your real personality.

 

For $5 Million +, as sought in the complaint, most people probably would.

DreamscapeHorizons  
3 min ago
#34
Yeah, If I were paid 5 million they could say ANYTHING they wanted about me.

And if you don't get a penny? you would still be okay with it?

Barney-Boondoggle
dfgh123 wrote:
Barney-Boondoggle wrote:
dfgh123 wrote:

So you guys would be okay with some producer using your name and likeness and giving you an opposite personality to your real personality.

 

For $5 Million +, as sought in the complaint, most people probably would.

DreamscapeHorizons  
3 min ago
#34
Yeah, If I were paid 5 million they could say ANYTHING they wanted about me.

And if you don't get a penny? you would still be okay with it?

Ummm.... no.  That's pretty much the point of a tort claim lawsuit, according to Legalzoom.com.

Doesn't anyone even read anymore???

lfPatriotGames
dfgh123 wrote:

So you guys would be okay with some producer using your name and likeness and giving you an opposite personality to your real personality.

I wouldn't really care. It's a fictional movie, so it doesn't really matter. I'm sure it's not the first time an actor in a fictional movie said something about a real life person that wasn't 100% accurate. 

mpaetz

     If people could successfully sue filmmakers for minor inaccuracies in admittedly fictional portrayals, the heir of real villains like Stalin or Al Capone would be billionaires by now.

Barney-Boondoggle
mpaetz wrote:

     If people could successfully sue filmmakers for minor inaccuracies in admittedly fictional portrayals, the heir of real villains like Stalin or Al Capone would be billionaires by now.

One might surmise that jurors would find an elderly woman GM chess trailblazer from a formerly oppressed satellite of the USSR, who is now pretty much the darling of the chess universe, a little more sympathetic than the potential plaintiffs you mentioned.

lfPatriotGames
Barney-Boondoggle wrote:
mpaetz wrote:

     If people could successfully sue filmmakers for minor inaccuracies in admittedly fictional portrayals, the heir of real villains like Stalin or Al Capone would be billionaires by now.

One might surmise that jurors would find an elderly woman GM chess trailblazer from a formerly oppressed satellite of the USSR, who is now pretty much the darling of the chess universe, a little more sympathetic than the potential plaintiffs you mentioned.

Very unlikely. What the jurors might find actually is a greedy lawyer taking advantage of an old woman. Nona likely has or had no interest in any of this. But what started out as idle conversation over coffee turned into a lawsuit. At age 80 some people can be manipulated much more easily than when they were younger.  All the lawyer had to do is convince Nona the case has merit. Probably not too difficult to do to an 80 year old. 

Mpaetz is right. There are countless examples of movie makers having lines in movies about real people that are FAR more eye raising than this. The line in Queens Gambit actually has some truth to it, so there is basically no chance of the lawsuit going anywhere. 

In the movie Anchorman, the character Champ becomes a commentator for the NFL. But he gets fired after being accused of sexual harassment by Terry Bradshaw (a real person). The real life person (just like the thousands of other examples) don't get to sue the movie makers because they said something about a real life person that isn't true. It's just the way it is. If you want to be angry at someone, be angry at the lawyer who convinced Nona this was a good idea.