Watchmen Lawsuit Pt. 18: Studio Sniping Over Who is Better is Really About Stopping Watchmen

It was previously mentioned that both sides in the Watchmen legal case filed multiple Motions in Limine to exclude evidence from trial. I noted that some of the Motions are strange but I didn't go much further than that. Now that the responses are filed, I will describe two Motions by Fox:

• Motion in Limine 2, which is an attempt to exclude (a) Fox's budgets for recent pictures; and (b) details of studio executive Tom Rothman's contract; and
• Motion in Limine 6, which is an attempt to exclude evidence or argument that Fox is an “underperforming studio” or that Warner Brothers is a “better” studio.
  

On the surface, arguing over who is a better studio may seem like petty sniping. The studios are actually fighting about something kind of important: the injunction to stop the Watchmen movie from being released on March 6, 2009.

In anticipation of Warner Brothers trial arguments, Fox filed the previously mentioned Motion in Limine to prevent Warner Brothers from presenting trial evidence that Fox studio is "underperforming," or that Warner Bros. is a "better" studio. Fox simply claimed that this evidence is irrelevant and unduly prejudicial to the issues in the case. Warner Brothers' response filled in the blanks left by Fox's skeletal motion. Warner Brothers said that this information is relevant to Fox's request for an injunction to stop the Watchmen movie, specifically Fox's claim that it would be irreparably harmed by the film's release. Warner Brothers bolstered its argument with various reasons why information about comparative studio performance and market share should be allowed at trial. Whether the evidence will actually be allowed is entirely up to the judge.