A Los Angeles federal jury delivered a swift and decisive verdict on Monday, completely rejecting claims that Disney’s hit film Moana was stolen from a little-known script about a young surfer in Hawaii. The jury, made up of six women and two men, took only about two and a half hours to conclude that the creators of Moana never had access to writer and animator Buck Woodall’s work titled Bucky the Surfer Boy.
With this crucial question of access resolved, the jury didn’t even need to examine the alleged similarities between the two stories. The verdict effectively dismissed Woodall’s claims and left him and his legal team contemplating their next move.
“Obviously, we’re disappointed,” said Gustavo Lage, Woodall’s attorney, outside the courtroom. “We’re going to review our options and think about the best path forward.”
The Allegations and the Defense
Woodall had argued that his work had been shared with a distant relative, Jenny Marchick, who was employed at a company working within the Disney lot. However, Marchick testified that she never passed Bucky the Surfer Boy along to anyone at Disney. In fact, messages revealed in court showed that she eventually stopped responding to Woodall’s inquiries and told him there was nothing she could do for him.
Disney’s defense, led by attorney Moez Kaba, painted a picture of an original creation deeply rooted in the artistic and cultural vision of its veteran filmmakers. Kaba emphasized that Moana was the brainchild of John Musker and Ron Clements—Disney legends responsible for classics like The Little Mermaid (1989), Aladdin (1992), Hercules (1997), and The Princess and the Frog (2009).
“They had no idea about Bucky,” Kaba asserted in his closing arguments. “They had never seen it, never heard of it.”
The Battle Over Similarities
Despite the jury’s quick dismissal, Woodall’s legal team pointed out what they saw as undeniable parallels between Bucky the Surfer Boy and Moana.
-
Both stories feature teenage protagonists embarking on oceanic quests.
-
Each narrative prominently includes a Polynesian demigod as a central character.
-
Shape-shifting elements appear in both, with transformations into insects, sharks, and other creatures.
-
The main characters interact with animal spirit guides.
However, Kaba countered these claims by explaining that such elements—Polynesian mythology, shape-shifting, and spiritual animal guides—are foundational themes in storytelling and not protected by copyright law. He pointed to the long-standing Disney tradition of incorporating these motifs, dating back to Pinocchio (1940) and present throughout Musker and Clements’ filmography.
The Lawsuit’s Complications
While Moana raked in nearly $700 million worldwide, Woodall’s lawsuit came far too late to claim a share of its earnings. A judge had already ruled that his 2020 lawsuit had exceeded the statute of limitations. However, Woodall recently filed another lawsuit against Disney over Moana 2, which has already surpassed $1 billion at the global box office. This second legal battle remains ongoing, though Monday’s verdict does not bode well for Woodall’s chances.
Judge Consuelo B. Marshall, who also oversees the Moana 2 case, agreed with the jury’s decision.
“We are incredibly proud of the collective work that went into the making of Moana and are pleased that the jury found it had nothing to do with Plaintiff’s works,” Disney stated following the verdict.
The Jury’s Perspective
During the two-week trial, the jury was shown Moana in its entirety. They also reviewed various versions of Bucky the Surfer Boy, including a 2003 outline, a 2008 update, and a full script from 2011.
In Woodall’s version, the main character, a young boy vacationing in Hawaii, befriends local kids and embarks on a quest that involves time travel, ancient Hawaiian demigods, and an effort to protect a sacred site from developers. Woodall testified that he was shocked when he saw Moana in 2016 and felt that so many of his ideas had been used.
Yet, Disney’s defense dismantled this claim, highlighting that the Moana story was developed through extensive research and creative inspiration. Kaba pointed to thousands of pages of development documents, showing step-by-step how Musker and Clements crafted the film’s narrative, drawing from sources such as Paul Gauguin’s paintings and Herman Melville’s writings.
“You can see every single fingerprint,” Kaba argued. “You can see the entire genetic makeup of Moana.”
The Aftermath
With this lawsuit settled in Disney’s favor, the company remains confident in its creative process and the integrity of Moana’s origins. Musker and Disney’s legal team declined to comment outside the courtroom, but their legal victory reinforces the strength of their case against Woodall’s allegations.
The Moana 2 lawsuit still looms, but with the jury’s strong rejection of Woodall’s claims in the first case, the road ahead looks rocky for his chances of success. As for Disney, this ruling serves as a firm defense of their creative rights and a reminder that storytelling inspiration cannot be easily claimed through circumstantial evidence.
Login