case that he will agree with the courtesans that green was there or agent not the principal now there is nothing in this record nothing in the complaint that could ever indicate that the kur identical the real question is whether there was true president right and if there was a conflict between the interests of the two parties i think you could persuade me it was no pretty but if in not that i'm aware of not from this record your honor i think what what the judge did it and what they argued what the defendants argued is that there was a work for hire and my understanding from the prior  was going on they knew that there was not a green cause of action and occurred as cause of action they know the case was going to be litigated then decided don't they have some duty you they were involved here so closely they're almost parties why didn't they intervene do they not have a duty if why should the duty fall entirely on the judge cause of action was because of the malpractise of mr longboat either he was intimidated by taking on the big boys in hollywood which is always a consideration for a solo practitioner judge  call mr greene your agent which makes it a much more serious relationship and gives my clients more authority because they're the principles that should be running the show and as you're back to your kind of like a gotcha situation i want to be respectful of judge bernard i've been thirty years in the business i did not want to step into an m a straight without full discovery the chance to put on our experts for another day another time pretty important in fact let me just ask you under headwaters you can have a similarity of interest but you have to have adequate representation didn't think he own the copyright and he had reason to believe that he didn't and what was the record evidence about ownership or was there indeed a written assignment placed you know evidence in that case regard this as an entity as a race as a cause of action it can't be split and if that is true and correct does not follow intervene or if the duty is on the court to join a necessary party or an indispensable party or to do something further i think that's necessary to get to what i want to know is if the thrust of both suits isn't the same and doesn't arise out of the same transaction all nucleus both claims  without intervening i'm not suggesting that they had an obligation to intervene but they didn't intervene and the reason i was in that they didn't intervene in this is going to come back to the issue of pretty the reason they didn't intervene is that if mr green not the green case can bind the curtis's we have to deal with headquarters which says there has to be adequacy of representation and that's the issue that they're making a very strong argument about it seems to me well  your question just one last or is there anything different is there anything new she didn't identify anything specifically she didn't say to you for example there's this particular scene in the treatment which was not in the script which nevertheless  that let me be very specific what's your response on the idea of either could stand or stop will certainly the purposes knew about it they participated to the extent of being a witness and whatever reasons and apparently nobody raised that issue and he says i'm not going to reach it now then he says in our case well i'll concede that you are the owners well if you are the owners of the entire similarity in the copyright federal copyright infringement and i might add that the defendants in putting in their unpublished decision the court in that case repeatedly sta