Francesca Gregorini vs. Apple Inc. et al

Case Background

On January 15, 2021, Plaintiff  Francesca Gregorini filed a copyright infringement lawsuit in the United States District Court, California Central, Western Division (Case number:  2:20cv406). This case was assigned to Judge Sunshine Suzanne Syke and referred to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian.

Cause

Francesca Gregorini, an independent filmmaker, filed a lawsuit against Apple Inc., M. Night Shyamalan, and Blinding Edge Pictures, alleging copyright infringement. She claimed that the defendants unlawfully copied her 2013 psychological thriller The Truth About Emanuel to create the Apple TV+ series Servant. Gregorini had written, directed, and produced Emanuel, which told the story of a troubled young woman hired as a nanny to care for an ultra-realistic doll. The doll, believed by the grieving mother to be her real child, played a key role in the plot.

The film explored themes of grief, psychological trauma, and misplaced maternal affection. Gregorini argued that Servant copied her film’s unique premise, themes, plot structure, character relationships, and cinematic techniques. She contended that the defendants had access to Emanuel, as it had been widely available on streaming platforms, including Apple’s own iTunes, before Servant premiered. Gregorini maintained that the striking similarities between her film and Servant were not coincidental. She alleged that the defendants had intentionally appropriated her creative work without her consent.

Injuries

Gregorini suffered significant professional and reputational harm due to the alleged copyright infringement. She had been working on developing Emanuel into a television series. The release of Servant effectively destroyed her opportunity to do so. By creating a show that closely mirrored her film, Apple and Shyamalan made it nearly impossible for her to pitch her work as an original idea in the entertainment industry. The lawsuit detailed how this alleged infringement diminished her credibility as a creator, making it difficult for her to secure new projects or partnerships. Gregorini also experienced emotional distress as she saw her deeply personal and unique artistic expression co-opted and altered by an all-male creative team. This stripped her work of the female perspective that had made it distinctive.

Damages

As a result of the alleged copyright infringement, Gregorini experienced financial losses. She lost licensing opportunities and saw a decrease in the market value of her intellectual property. She argued that Servant generated substantial profits for Apple TV+ and that those earnings should have rightfully belonged to her as the original creator. The lawsuit demanded actual damages to compensate her for the financial impact of the infringement and sought disgorgement of profits made by the defendants from the unauthorized adaptation. Additionally, Gregorini requested punitive damages. She asserted that Apple and Shyamalan had acted with blatant disregard for her rights and should be held accountable to prevent similar instances of copyright infringement in the entertainment industry.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Francesca Gregorini
    • Counsel for Plaintiff: Annie Huang | Emily E. Niles | Michael A. Geibelson | Patrick M. Arenz | Prateek N. Viswanathan
  • Defendant(s): Apple Inc., a California corporation |  M. Night Shyamalan, an individual | Blinding Edge Pictures, Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation | Uncle George Productions, a Pennsylvania corporation | Escape Artists LLC, a California limited liability company | Dolphin Black Productions, a California corporation | Tony Basgallop, an individual | Ashwin Rajan, an individual | Jason Blumenthal, an individual | Todd Black, an individual | Steve Tisch, an individual
    • Counsel for Defendants: Nicolas A. Jampol | Brittany B. Amadi | Carl Mazurek | Cydney Swofford Freeman | Heath A. Brooks | Meenakshi Krishnan | Samantha Whitney Lachman

Claims

Gregorini pursued several legal claims against the defendants. She asserted copyright infringement, arguing that Servant constituted an unauthorized derivative work of Emanuel, violating her exclusive rights under U.S. copyright law. She also alleged contributory and vicarious copyright infringement, asserting that Apple, Shyamalan, and other defendants had knowingly participated in and profited from the infringement. Furthermore, she sought injunctive relief, requesting that the court order Apple to cease distributing and promoting Servant and destroy all infringing materials. Gregorini emphasized that her case highlighted a broader issue in Hollywood, where large corporations and powerful male creators frequently appropriated the work of female artists without acknowledgment or compensation.

Defense

The defendants, including Apple Inc., M. Night Shyamalan, and Blinding Edge Pictures, denied all allegations of copyright infringement brought by Francesca Gregorini. They asserted that Servant was an entirely original work with no connection to The Truth About Emanuel. They argued that Servant had been conceived long before Emanuel was released. The defendants claimed that the similarities between the two works stemmed from common themes rather than direct copying. They contended that the idea of a grieving mother caring for a lifelike doll had existed in literature and film long before Gregorini’s movie.

The defendants further maintained that neither M. Night Shyamalan nor Tony Basgallop, the creator of Servant, had ever seen Emanuel. They emphasized that Gregorini failed to provide direct evidence proving that they had access to her film before creating Servant. Apple, as the distributor of Servant, argued that it had no role in the show’s creative process and merely licensed and promoted the series. Additionally, the defendants pointed out significant differences between the two works, including variations in tone, setting, character development, and thematic execution. They believed these differences undermined Gregorini’s claims of substantial similarity.

In their legal defense, the defendants argued that Gregorini’s claims lacked merit. They contended that she failed to establish that Emanuel was protectable under copyright law in a way that would bar the creation of Servant. They also argued that Servant was a transformative and independent work that did not constitute copyright infringement. Furthermore, they claimed that any similarities between the two projects fell within the scope of generic storytelling conventions, which copyright law does not protect. They sought dismissal of the lawsuit, arguing that Gregorini’s complaint failed to state a valid claim for relief.

Jury Verdict

On January 24, 2025, the jury found in favor of the defendants, including Apple Inc. and M. Night Shyamalan. The jury ruled that Servant did not commit copyright infringement against Francesca Gregorini’s 2013 film, The Truth About Emanuel. The jury determined that the defendants had never had access to Emanuel before creating Servant, making it unnecessary to decide whether the two works were substantially similar. Without evidence proving that the defendants had seen or copied Gregorini’s film, the jury concluded that the lawsuit lacked merit and that no copyright infringement had occurred.

Further, the jury accepted the defendants’ argument that Servant had been independently conceived and developed without influence from Emanuel. They found no direct connection between the two projects beyond general storytelling themes, which copyright law does not protect.

Court Documents:

Documents are available for purchase upon request at jurimatic@exlitem.com