Operation Claude Robinson

On September 8, 1995, Claude Robison recognizes Robinson Curiosité, the character he created (renamed Robinson Sucroë by the plagiarists), airing on Canal Famille. In fact, he recognizes himself since he had crafted the character after himself. His whole world turns upside down.

During his testimony at the Superior Court, he declared “I was K.O.; I could not speak to people anymore. At the restaurant, I started crying uncontrollably. These people knew me personally. They knew I had invested myself in this project. There was a deep reflection and a personal engagement on my side. The depth of my adversaries’ cruelty is what scares me.”

The Facts:

1982

Claude Robinson creates Robinson Curiosité, the main character for a children’s cartoon series, based on his own face. He develops the concept, creates other characters, and writes summaries, scenarios and a bible where each character is pictured.

1983 to 1985

Claude Robinson presents Les Aventures de Robinson Curiosité to various producers and broadcasters in Quebec, as well as Téléfilm Canada. In 1985, he associates with Pathonic in order to produce the animated series.

1986

Claude Robinson and Pathonic hire Cinar in a consulting role to promote and sell the series to the United-States market. In the contract signed by Ronald A. Weinberg, Cinar agrees to take cognizance of the whole project (characters, synopsis, scenarios and other components). Claude Robinson goes to New York and Los Angeles with Cinar and Pathonic representatives to meet various producers and broadcasters. Despite the interest manifested by American broadcasters, these meetings do not yield any results.

1987

Claude Robinson teams up with a new partner, SDA, and now also aims for the European market. In April, he presents his project at the MIP-TV, in Cannes, among others, to Christophe Izard, who was with Calypa at the time, and to Peter Hille, president of Ravensburger. There, he meets with Micheline Charest and Ronald A. Weinberg. Thérésa Plummer-Andrews from the BBC requests a demo tape of Robinson Curiosité.

1988 to 1994

In 1988, Claude Robinson founded a new business in order to independently produce his project.

1995

Some steps taken with Philips to produce interactive CD-is yield results. However, on September 4, Claude Robinson sees the first episode of Robinson Sucroé airing on Canal Famille. He is shocked. In early October, he sends Cinar a demand, who claims it does not have any traces from any Claude Robinson or his work in its archives. In early November, he files a formal complaint (RCMP) for copyright counterfeiting and sends a second demand, in vain.

1996

In July 1996, Claude Robinson files a civil action against the producers of Robinson Sucroé. Through countless time-consuming procedures and numerous attorney changes, Cinar and its accomplices managed to delay the trial for over 12 years.

The Procedures:

Autumn 1996

After four precision requests regarding his declaration, the respondents deny Claude Robinson the right to sue foreign firms in Quebec and file an interlocutory proceeding in order for his legal action against the BBC and Ravensburger to be declared illegal, and to have all fees and damages imputed to him.

February 1997

The trial judge grants Claude Robinson the right to sue foreign firms in Quebec and adds that for the objection to the jurisdiction: “Without going into all the details of proof they’ve offered, the claimants have established that the defendants have plagiarized and infringed the claimant’s copyright regarding his work entitled Robinson Curiosité”. This ruling will be appealed.

Spring 1997

The criminal complaint for counterfeiting continues, and searches are performed at Téléfilm Canada and Cinar. The RCMP completes its investigation and requests for court action are filed with the Crown, who decides not to lay charges.

October 1997

In the civil courts, the Court of Appeal unanimously confirms the first instance verdict, thus granting Claude Robinson the right to sue foreign companies and their directors here in Quebec. This ruling is jurisprudential, as it shows the accurate application of a clause of the new civil code.

October 1998

The defendants initiate a new procedure to force Claude to choose between damages or profits, under the pretext that he is not entitled to both. Claude Robinson states he’s entitled to both and that he should own the counterfeit work. The Court rules in his favour. This judgement is not appealed and is jurisprudential in similar cases.

Autumn 1999 and Winter 2000

The scandal regarding the nominees breaks out due to Claude Robinson’s investigative work. At the federal and provincial levels, public funds management policies are reviewed. The RCMP is mandated to investigate some fiscal irregularities, and Robinson’s complaint for counterfeiting is reactivated.

January 2000

At Claude Robinson’s request, the Chief Justice of the Superior Court assigns a judge to the case—Judge Pierre Tessier.

September 2000

With the Court’s permission, Claude Robinson registers the McRaw society, property of Micheline Charest and Ronald A. Weinberg, as well as Hélène Charest, as respondents to the claim.

February 2001

Through another request, Micheline Charest and Ronald A. Weinberg’s attorneys file a formal demand for all documents and information obtained during interrogations to be confidential in order to prevent Claude Robinson to use them for investigation purposes. The court of first instance rules in their favour.

Mai 2001

Claude Robinson appeals this decision, invoking he would then be prevented from investigating and would hamper his right to a fair trial. The Court of Appeal partially reverses this judgment at first instance by ruling that Claude Robinson is allowed to investigate and get knowledge regarding his case, while confirming the confidentiality of the documents and information thus obtained.

January 2002

On January 22, the Crown announces it does not intend to file a criminal charge against Cinar for tax evasion, but the criminal investigation regarding the counterfeiting complaint continues.

February 2002

Cinar and the other respondents initiate new procedures to change attorneys.

March 2002

The Commission des valeurs mobilières du Québec fines the Charest/Weinberg couple $1,000,000 each, and forbids them from directing or managing any publically-traded business in Canada for 5 years.

December 2003

As the RCMP is about to interrogate the key witnesses suspected of plagiarism, Justice Canada calls the investigation off under the pretext that it is not of “public interest” (despite the fact that it had been requested by a minister). In 2001, in a preliminary report, RCMP investigators wrote: “It seems increasingly obvious that Robinson Curiosité was plagiarized.” The investigation will never be completed, raising some questions regarding a possible cover-up.

2005

The dilatory procedures and attorney changes on the defendant side continue to delay the process.

September 2, 2008

Following a long judicial battle, the Robinson-Cinar trial begins at the Superior Court of Québec.

December 1, 2008

After three months of hearings in Montreal, the trial moves to Paris to hear about fifteen European witnesses.

August 26, 2009

Judge Claude Auclair, from the Superior Court of Québec, concludes that Claude Robinson’s work was plagiarized, and condemns the defendants to pay him 5.2 million dollars.

September 22, 2009

France Animation, Christophe Izard—the plagiarist and executive producer of Robinson Sucroë—and Ravensburger Film appeal the case based on erroneous legal grounds. They consider that Judge Auclair “decided wrongly by founding his decision on Dr. Claude Perraton’s expert report.”

September 25, 2009

Cinar, Ronald Weinberg and Christian Davin, CEO of France Animation, appeal the case for the same reasons. They also dispute the amount of $400,000 awarded for moral damages to Claude Robinson by the judge.