The Satanic Temple Amicably Settles Lawsuit Against Warner Brother & Netflix

The Satanic Temple Amicably Settles Lawsuit Against Warner Brother & Netflix November 21, 2018
Image Credit: The Satanic Temple

The Satanic Temple is pleased to announce that the lawsuit it recently filed against Warner Bros. and Netflix has been amicably settled.  The unique elements of the Satanic Temple’s Baphomet statue have been acknowledged in the credits of episodes which have already been filmed.  The remaining terms of the settlement are subject to a confidentiality agreement.

Many people immediately supported our copyright claim and felt they recognized it to have clear merit. Surprisingly, to me, however, there were also a large number of people who flooded us with hate mail and armchair legal analysis.

I have gotten quite a bit of hate mail from people seemingly basic enough to conceive of the situation as one in which a large powerful Satanic organization is using its might to bully an uncertain and innocent teenage witch who has just been newly exposed to the wide, cruel world. One email implored me to not “ruin” a show that “just tries to bring joy into the world.”

When I read these things, I can’t help but wonder when the last time was that any of these angry commenters wrote to a public representative or approached any issue of importance in any way. Ironically, however, many of messages put the blame of misallocated outrage upon us, some of them saying they liked us better when we focused on Church/State issues. More than a few people seem to think that because this story gained so much media attention that we, too, have been disproportionately focused on this issue.

The truth is, it is a poor commentary upon our entire culture, in my eyes, that media overwhelmed this copyright claim, relative to which the coverage of our rally in Arkansas, which confronted still unresolved questions about the continued American dedication to Liberal Democracy, received sparse reporting for a day.

I particularly loved the confused claim from the people who said we were “playing victim,” with the alternative being that we simply stand silent when we feel our work may have been exploited. Interesting, too, are the almost equal numbers of those who say we’re being “just like Christians” (though how is never made clear), opposed to those who protest that our move here is incomprehensible because “you never see another religion making this kind of claim.”

All I can say about the case now is what was italicized above:

The Satanic Temple is pleased to announce that the lawsuit it recently filed against Warner Bros. and Netflix has been amicably settled.  The unique elements of the Satanic Temple’s Baphomet with Children statue have been acknowledged in the credits of episodes which have already been filmed.  The remaining terms of the settlement are subject to a confidentiality agreement,

So ends one of the most overpublicized of copyright claims. Press can now stop pretending this was unique and momentous, or even interesting. So, too, hopefully ends the parade of stupidity from online amateur legal experts.


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Darth Manu

    So long the ostentatious outrage about the « asinine Satanic Panic fiction « , I guess
    Apart from the fact that a settlement is not a victory but a compromise, this outcome, despite what the arrogant triumphalist tone of this superficial note might suggest, shows that all TST propaganda about Sabrina’s alleged anti-satanist speech was smoke and mirrors , and that all you were looking for (again) was free advertising and perhaps a source of easy money.

  • Hillary Jo

    I like how when it started, no one mentioned the copyright issue, it was all “angry Satanists!” And now that it’s settled, its all “Greedy satanists!” Wow. Such thought. Much deep. But I mean, if you’re not smart enough to read beyond the headlines… I guess you would think it was all about “Satanists” in an organization comprised mostly of atheists… Idiots have a short attention span.

    If someone stole your art and profited off it for a cause you didn’t like, I’m sure you’d be pissed if people were mad at you when you sued to at least get your copyright acknowledge or maybe even paid for their use of your art.

  • The Broker

    How do you imagine that this announcement proves anything of the type? How do you know it’s a compromise and not a victory? Do you somehow know the terms of the settlement? I have a feeling that you simply have an idea in mind, and you assume that everything proves what you’ve decided you already know.

  • The only thing mentioned on *this* blog was the copyright issue. It’s not my fault everyone else wanted to follow the smoke and not the fire.

  • Hillary Jo

    I didn’t mean you, or this blog, I meant all of the other coverage I saw of this issue. I”m speaking in general terms.

  • Darth Manu

    Nice Red Herring fallacy, Doug/Lucien etc. But as you well know, no one acts or takes a position from a hypothetical absolute knowledge. I comment what I see on the basis of what I know, and I think that the distortion between your firsts tweets and the present post is evidence enough and I stand on my ground. But it is clear that you are asking this question purely rhetorically and not for dialogue. Having no time to lose, and having said what I had to say, I retire and leave you the final word. Bye !

  • The Broker

    “The distortion” he says, without even attempting to make sense of his irrational and aimless outrage toward anything TST-related, but instead runs off deciding that if he doesn’t try to make sense of his comments, somebody might mistake them for having sense or substance. We’ll just all sit about left to wonder how a settlement of the suit came to prove that the intentions of the filing were different from what was presented. “I comment what I see on the basis of what I know.” Clearly you don’t know much.

  • Garth Croft

    Such a sad man you are. Posting blind conjecture and conclusions without substance, despite the availability of much evidence to the contrary, only proves out your relative ignorance on this issue.
    A settlement is indeed a ‘victory’… for both sides. Not all conflicts must result in a zero-sum resolution, but it seems that you can only imagine that a ‘win’ can only be had if the other party ‘loses’. In this case, TST gained a great deal, and TW/Netflix likely lost relatively little. Such easily counts as a ‘win’.

  • It needs to be said that said ‘ostentatious outrage’ would’ve been instrumental if WB had tried to make a fair use claim. They opted to settle, but if they hadn’t then the effect it had on perception would’ve been very important.

  • ephemerol

    I particularly loved the confused claim from the people who said we were “playing victim,” with the alternative being that we simply stand silent when we feel our work may have been exploited.

    How dare Satanists have the nerve to assert that they have rights in a christian nation! /s

  • Petit_Lutin

    For someone that hates TST so much, maybe you should stop following their accounts on social media. It’s like you crawled up their assholes with a night light and a good book.

  • Petit_Lutin

    Congratulations on showing people that theft is bullshit no matter who does it. It’s been a fun month seeing that the only thing that truly matters to most people in the great ol’ U S of A is their dang tv programs.

  • Jim Jones

    Try copying a Disney movie and see how tolerant they are.

  • Jennny

    Or, because I’m a crafter, try copying and selling anything Disney, a small hair bow, even and I know Disney will come after you…and I don’t know of any crafter who’s come off well in a threatened law suit by the Mouse.,

  • I’m consistent. My issue is with TST ignoring its own tenets. While copyright law establishes the privilege of controlling the use of images and other created content, utilizing that law and asserting such control violates TST’s tenet of not restricting freedom.

  • The Broker

    No, it doesn’t. Not in the least. If you think you renounce your own rights to your own property when you follow the tenets, when you think that your compassion toward others necessitates that stand silent when you think your own work has been taken and exploited, you’re clearly either not understanding the tenets or not understanding this case.

  • Intellectual property is a myth. I suggest you read “What is Property” by Pierre Joseph Proudhon. An idea is not something that you can own. To “maintain” it requires the use of force. If you think you have a right to prevent other people from using an idea, an image, etc, just because you came up with it, then you might want to think about what a right is and what property is.

    Think about it. Say I come up with a cure for cancer. I now own that cure? Really? I can own any vials of the cure that I make, and of course I have a right not to divulge the method of production, but that’s it. If I explain how I made it, the only way to prevent others from making it is threatening them with imprisonment or death. That’s not a right.

  • The Broker

    But this isn’t your free use utopia where artists and intellectuals are at liberty to see their hard work appropriated without damage to their ability to sustain their work and survive. Somebody had already been paid for art, it was just the wrong people who got paid. To the point of finding a cancer cure: say you come up with the cure after dedicating your life and all your finances to it and some powerful corporation comes along, pays you nothing, replicates your work, and charges people an exorbitant amount for the treatment? How is that just?

  • Again, I recognize that US law creates privileges associated with intellectual property. However, that privilege is not the same thing as a right. 200 years ago, it was a privilege in this country that one could own another human, but that doesn’t mean that it was a right.

  • Kevin K

    You know, when I saw that statue in the show, I kinda wondered about whether you had given them the rights to it. Now I know.

    Would that they had consulted you on the humanist tenets of your group as well. Theologically speaking, the show is a mess.

  • Cozmo the Magician

    South Park got away with it (: Because SATIRE is ‘fair use’

  • Cozmo the Magician

    Riiiigth. The TST infiltrated Netflix and MADE them use that art, just so that TST could get some publicity. Riiiiight.

    Pull the other one , it has bells.

  • Cozmo the Magician

    Did a quick google ‘copyright crucifix’


  • S.r. Aichinger

    And just like that I think the Satanic Temple is petty and catty. They do good work, but they seem to not follow their own rules. Oh well.

  • The Broker

    And just like that The Satanic Temple is glad to be rid of an idiot who doesn’t understand the value in them protecting their Intellectual Property like any self respecting organization would.

  • S.r. Aichinger

    Wow. Is the name-calling necessary? Shouldn’t a group so interested in rational thought be above that?

    Come at me once you know what my thoughts on the lawsuit are. (Hint: I never said anything that would suggest I don’t “understand the value in them protecting their Intellectual Property.”

    Also, good use of unnecessary capitalization. Trump would approve.

  • Dude, there’s a lot of that. Y’know that big Jesus statue in Rio? That’s copyrighted too and they’ve sued over movies using it at least 3 times that I could find. This is far from uncommon, people are just paying attention to it because of who is involved.

  • I’m not sure which of their rules you don’t think they’re following. “People are fallible” maybe? But in this case an appropriate apology on WB’s part involved some agreed upon restitution. I don’t see the other TST tenets being very applicable.

  • Steve McElroy

    “I’m amazed that anybody is confused as to why we would seek legal remedy over Sabrina using our monument. Would they be as understanding of a fictional show that used a real mosque as the HQ of a terrorist cell? A fictional Blood Libel tale implicating real world Jews?” Wow Anti-Semitic and Islamaphobic in the same sentence. Way to unite the MIddle East, Lucy. (Source Jews are now the victims of 65% of all religious hate crimes, assaults on Muslim surpassed it’s numbers in 2001 last year, and The Satanic Temple, (Not real Satanists) got butthurt over a Netflix show with a statue that looked similar to theirs. Talk about a false comparison.

  • Cozmo the Magician

    Yup, use a copyright image of JESUS, We gonna NAIL you sucker! Steal a work depicting something else: “Why are you being such a cry baby snowflake?”

  • The Broker

    I guess reading comprehension isn’t very easy for you, but that comment you’re criticizing was clearly NOT speaking in favor of religious persecution, but against it. I guess you seem to be saying that religious persecution is okay, so long as it’s directed at Satanists (and both Jews and Muslims have been accused by Christians at various points of worshipping Satan), because Satanists haven’t suffered enough persecution yet to have a valid complaint in your mind? Really trying to understand how you’re trying to twist this into some justification for outrage?

  • The Broker

    I seriously want to know what you think he meant by the comment you’re criticizing. I still can’t see any way to interpret the quote into an endorsement of religious persecution.

  • Steve McElroy

    Its a false comparrison it’s like saying, “Ow I stumped my toe, this is as bad as Hiroshima.” It trivializes the thing you are comparing it against. The blood libel myth led to the murder of thousands of Jews and 9/11 led to hundreds of violent hate crimes against Muslims, but yeah thats the same as a tv show using a stutue that looks lile yours. Also the Satanic Temple doesn’t worship Satan (Their words) so how are they Satanists?

  • The Broker

    Now what are you even talking about? The statement wasn’t “Sabrina is as bad as the Holocaust”, it was a question of how one would feel if any other religious group was represented in that way. And people have been persecuted on accusations of Satanism and false assumptions regarding what that means, even in recent times. This isn’t a game of who’s-more-persecuted, it’s a comment against religious persecution in general, non-theistic religions included.

  • John Gills

    As a fogie, I’m dismayed that Jimmy Page et al are still defending the intro to “Stairway to Heaven.” Artists’ work deserves protection – unless maybe I can copyright the Dm7 chord and make a fortune…

  • Sophotroph

    There is no earthly way you’re actually that stupid. You’d have killed yourself tying your shoes by now.

  • Michael Barillas

    Well Its An Example Of The Next Step To Collect Tax Money For Private Companies Of U. Satanists Of America.

  • Steve McElroy

    Nobody said that. Do you understand how quotatation marks work?The statement was its the same as blood libel which was used to fuel hatred of the Jews. Also when you give an example of comparison you are saying this is as bad as this. That’s what a comparison is. The Satanic Temple’s case is not the same as all. One the Satanic Temple aten’t Satanists because they don’t worship Satan. One could even argue that they aren’t even a religion since they can’t seem to decide if they are a religion or if they are anti-religion. Two saying Jews eat babies is not the same as having a statue that practically a facimile (although apparently legally distinct) of the statue you designed used in a show about demons when the purpose of said statue was to look demonic in order to offend another religion. If you cant see why those are two completely different things that are vastly different in severity then I refer you to the comment below.

  • Steve McElroy

    Good retort. Did you come up with all by yourself or did somebody help you?

  • Sophotroph

    Good retort. Did you come up with it all by yourself or did somebody help you?

  • 1) Satanists don’t worship Satan; all Satanic organizations have been very clear on this point. 2) TST is a religion that is anti-theocracy. Theocracy is not religion; it’s a system of government with no separation of church and state. You’re confusing atheism and antitheism with being anti-religion. They aren’t the same thing.