‘Complete’ James Bond movie package not so complete. So Pierce County woman is suing

Chief U.S. District Court Judge Ricardo S. Martinez knows his James Bond movies.

A lawsuit of interest to 007 enthusiasts has made its way to his court, and on Thursday Martinez ruled that some elements can move forward, while others were dismissed.

The judge worked titles from the British superspy franchise throughout his written decision. “From the Defendants’ perspective,” one section reads, “this claim will have to ‘Die Another Day.’”

At issue in the class action, which reached U.S. District Court in April, is which movies should be included in a “complete collection” of Bond films.

“Will the real ‘James Bond’ please stand up?” the judge’s order begins in a reference to the text on the back cover of the 2011 “Casino Royale” collector’s edition DVD.

Pierce County resident Mary L. Johnson argues the set she ordered online was incomplete, because it was missing the 1967 version of “Casino Royale” and 1983’s “Never Say Never Again.” Neither film was produced by Eon Productions, the British company that holds the rights to the bulk of the Bond films.

Johnson sued MGM Studios, Twentieth-Century Fox Home Entertainment, MGM Holdings, and Twenty-First Century Fox, in March.

She is alleging the box set she bought in February 2016 for about $106 was wrongfully advertised as containing “all the Bond films” and “every gorgeous girl, nefarious villain and charismatic star.”

The companies asked Martinez to toss the suit, but the judge said he’d let some of Johnson’s claims stand, while dismissing others.

“At this time, the Court will ‘Live and Let Die,’” Martinez wrote.

One of Johnson’s allegations he said can proceed in court is that the boxed set marketing violated Washington State’s Consumer Protection Act.

Part of his order says: “... the Court must leave it to the jury to determine whether the box-sets’ representations establish an affirmation of fact or promise of a complete compilation of James Bond movies under (state law).”

“Likewise, a jury must determine whether a reasonable person would expect ‘Casino Royale’ and ‘Never Say Never Again’ to be included in a complete set of James Bond films.”

One claim he dismissed was that corporate parents Twenty-First Century Fox and MGM Holdings can be held liable. Johnson’s claim against the parent companies is insufficient to proceed, but she can amend it later, Martinez said.

He also tossed Johnson’s claim that the defendants breached an “implied warranty” based on the product description.

Because Johnson hasn’t said which webpage on Amazon.com she bought the set from, she hasn’t established what duty the defendants had to her under the “implied warranty” part of state law, Martinez said.

“Plaintiff may amend her claim once if she discovers sufficient facts to establish privity; thus, this claim may ‘Only Live Twice,’” the judge wrote.

And he ended with: “Although ‘Diamonds Are Forever,’ if plaintiff wishes to amend her complaint as directed above, she only has fourteen days from the date of this order.”

This story was originally published August 4, 2017 at 5:19 PM with the headline "‘Complete’ James Bond movie package not so complete. So Pierce County woman is suing."