Disney alleges that the firm of Stephen Slesinger Inc. withheld
key documents and hired a convicted criminal to steal evidence from
Disney, according to a report by news agency Reuters.
Stephen Slesinger Inc. sued in 1991, accusing the media giant of
failing to report sales of videos and computer software featuring
the world's most famous bear.
Shirley Lasswell, whose former husband Stephen Slesinger
acquired the merchandising rights to Winnie the Pooh from its
creator A. A Milne in 1930, and her daughter Pati Slesinger, have
claimed in the suit that Walt Disney did not pay royalties on
unreported software sales of $35 million, and on video sales of $3
billion.
The royalties claims are based on a 1961 contract between Disney
and Stephen Slesinger Inc., renewed in 1983.
Walt Disney rejects the allegations, maintaining that the
merchandise in question is not covered by the contract. According
to the company, the terms of the contract cannot be stretched to
cover videos and software, products beyond imagination in 1930,
when the rights were disclosed to Slesinger.
Walt Disney, which makes an estimated $1 billion per year from
sales of Winnie the Pooh merchandise, claimed in 2001 that it had
reached an agreement with the heirs of A.A Milne and illustrator
E.H. Shepherd, which would give the company exclusive worldwide
rights to the character. Stephen Slesinger Inc. disagreed.
Walt Disney, which has warned investors that it may be liable
for "several hundred million dollars" if it loses the case, has now
filed a motion asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit.
According to Reuters, Disney claims that Slesinger hid memos
that Pati Slesinger wrote to her mother, containing details of
conversations she had with a Disney employee related to the
licensing deal. According to Disney, the documents are decisive to
the outcome of the case but were only presented after that employee
and other negotiators of the 1983 deal had died.
Disney also claims that Stephen Slesinger Inc. hired an
unlicensed investigator, who in turn appointed an ex-convict to
break into Disney's premises and steal vital legal documents, and
asks the court to throw out the suit due to its opponent's
"pervasive misconduct and illegal activities."
