Screenwriter Anika Decker has been litigating against Til Schweiger and his then distributor Warner Brothers for five years now, over a fair share of the incredible proceeds from the two super hit films “Keinohrhasen” and “Zweiohrküken”, which she played a key role in shaping as an author. At the end of September, the Berlin Regional Court announced a verdict that Til Schweiger and Warner may have liked.
The judge said that Decker’s claims would be recognized “only to a small extent” and that she would also have to pay the full legal costs. The court agreed with her that she had provided a service that was in no way adequately rewarded according to the so-called “fairness paragraph” of copyright law. But she should have taken care of filing her claims sooner.
She has not yet been involved in the lion’s share because of the statute of limitations
Anika Decker has now lodged an appeal against this verdict, as a court spokeswoman announced on Wednesday at the request of the German Press Agency. This means that the case ends up again before the Berlin Court of Appeal. It is no longer a question of whether Til Schweiger worked as a co-author, as was claimed by him and Warner Brothers in the previous trial.
The court completely rejected this argument and confirmed Decker’s almost sole authorship. According to the judges, the fact that she never had a sufficient share of the profits is no longer controversial – she would be entitled to 3.68 percent of the net proceeds for “no-eared rabbits” and 3.48 percent for “two-eared chicks”. Decker therefore spoke of a “milestone” for authors. However, it makes a crucial difference when you start calculating.
Decker and her lawyer argue that proceeds from all DVD, television and ancillary rights that accrued after the films were released in theaters and that had to be disclosed in the course of the trial must be counted – that would probably be more than two million euros . However, the regional court’s ruling only wanted to recognize those amounts that had accrued in the last three years before the lawsuit was filed until today. According to the judges, anyone who does nothing within the official limitation period of three years will forfeit their claims. Decker would only be entitled to a share of a good 180,000 euros in the two cinema hits.
Decker is now campaigning against this interpretation again, primarily with the argument that she was kept in the dark and could not know or suspect how well the films sold on DVD and therefore a statute of limitations cannot apply. The judges countered with the “common sense” that huge cinema hits usually become huge DVD hits, but Decker remained inactive for many years. This must now be negotiated in the new process.