By Larry Neumeister
Associated Press
NEW YORK (AP) — A Manhattan judge has found a lot of differences between the porn classic “Deep Throat” and last year’s Hollywood-produced biography of the world’s first major porn star.
U.S. District Judge Thomas Griesa tossed out a lawsuit brought by Arrow Productions Limited against the Weinstein Co. and other defendants in a written decision that was publicly released Tuesday.
The judge said he decided after reviewing both films that the makers of the Hollywood film did not copy the core of “Deep Throat,” which came out in 1972. He said “Deep Throat” is a pornographic film focusing on one type of sex act while “Lovelace” is a critical, biographical film which contains no pornographic scenes or nudity.
In Monday’s decision, Griesa described “Deep Throat” as a “famous pornographic film replete with explicit sexual scenes and sophomoric humor” while he said “Lovelace” documents the tragic life of Linda Lovelace, whose real name was Linda Boreman.
The lawsuit attempted to prevent the distribution of “Lovelace” when it was released last year, but Griesa did not allow it.
The judge said the reproduction in “Lovelace” of three scenes from “Deep Throat” was transformative, adding “a new, critical perspective on the life of Linda Lovelace and the production of ‘Deep Throat.’”
Attorney Evan Mandel said Arrow Productions was reviewing the decision and considering an appeal. Lawyers for the defendants did not immediately return requests for comment.
Although “Deep Throat,” which cost less than $50,000 to make, grossed anywhere from $100 million to $600 million, its star actress only ever collected her salary of $1,250. She later wrote an account of her experiences entitled “Ordeal” and promoted anti-pornography and women’s causes until her 2002 death in a car accident.
- Posted August 28, 2014
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
Judge dismisses suit over 'Deep Throat' film
headlines Detroit
- Grand jury refuses to indict Slotkin, other Dems over military orders video
- The Trump Administration is Losing Credibility with Judges and Grand Juries — Why This is ‘Remarkable and Unprecedented’
- ABA book provides a guide to the Indian Child Welfare Act and its legal and cultural significance
- Apology ‘for the harm’ inflicts even more pain to aftermath of killings
- Daily Briefs
headlines National
- A wave of lawsuits has resulted from online comments after Charlie Kirk’s assassination
- Goldman Sachs top lawyer resigns after emails show Jeffrey Epstein friendship
- Failed indictment of 6 Democratic lawmakers blamed on Jeanine Pirro-picked prosecutors
- Federal judges may address ‘illegitimate forms of criticism and attacks,’ according to new ethics opinion
- Senate GOP aims to reveal companies funding lawsuits
- Bad Bunny’s ‘love conquering hate’ message at Super Bowl reiterated by judge sentencing assaulter




