Disney seems to have escalated its legal battle with Scarlett Johansson.

Johansson filed a complaint against Disney, claiming that the simultaneous release of Black Widow on Disney+ and in theaters constituted a breach of contract. Disney swiftly responded to Johansson’s lawsuit, calling it “sad and distressing” and questioning her sympathy for the pandemic. Following Disney’s scathing statements, many people have come out in favor of Johansson. Some are considering filing their own complaints, while women-led organizations have criticized Disney for their attack on Johansson’s character.

According to Variety, longtime Disney attorney Daniel Petrocelli said that the claims in Johansson’s lawsuit are considerably outside the scope of the actor’s contract with the company. He described it as a failed attempt to get Disney to write a check.

“It is obvious that this is a highly orchestrated PR campaign to achieve an outcome that is not obtainable in the lawsuit,” he added. “No amount of public pressure can change or obscure the explicit contractual commitments. The written contract is clear as a bell.”

Petrocelli expressly said that the contract between Johansson and Disney stipulates that any disagreements must be resolved through arbitration rather than in open court. The deal also purportedly requires Disney to distribute Black Widow on at least 1,500 screens in the United States, which Disney accomplished by releasing the movie on 9,000 screens in the United States and 30,000 internationally. Petrocelli further points out that, no matter what others say, Disney makes all distribution decisions.

The statement is definitely strong, and it is consistent with Disney’s prior responses. However, such a remark may be unwise given that Johansson’s lawsuit has already harmed Disney. As the litigation progresses, the company’s reputation is being called into question. Former Disney CEO Bob Igor is said to be embarrassed by the situation, and Marvel CEO Kevin Feige is apparently unhappy with how it is being handled. Meanwhile, most of the outrage aimed at Disney isn’t so much about the complexities of the case as it is about their dubious statements about Johansson that might be seen as attacks on her character.

According to the petition, which The Independent read, Johansson’s remuneration for the film was “largely based” on Black Widow’s box office performance.

“To maximise these receipts, and thereby protect her financial interests, Ms Johansson extracted a promise from Marvel that the release of the Picture would be a ‘theatrical release’. As Ms Johansson, Disney, Marvel, and most everyone else in Hollywood knows, a ‘theatrical release’ is a release that is exclusive to movie theatres,” the lawsuit states in part.

“Disney was well aware of this promise, but nonetheless directed Marvel to violate its pledge and instead release the Picture on the Disney+ streaming service the very same day it was released in movie theatres.” The suit goes on to allege that “Disney intentionally induced Marvel’s breach of the Agreement, without justification, in order to prevent Ms Johansson from realising the full benefit of her bargain with Marvel.”

“It’s no secret that Disney is releasing films like Black Widow directly onto Disney+ to increase subscribers and thereby boost the company’s stock price – and that it’s hiding behind Covid-19 as a pretext to do so,” said John Berlinski, an attorney for Johansson, in a statement to The Independent.

Petrocelli’s statements, according to Johansson’s lawyer John Berlinski, were a “a desperate attempt” to repair Disney’s image in the aftermath of significant criticism.

Last week, The Walt Disney Company told The Independent, “There is no merit whatsoever to this filing. The lawsuit is especially sad and distressing in its callous disregard for the horrific and prolonged global effects of the Covid-19 pandemic. Disney has fully complied with Ms Johansson’s contract and furthermore, the release of Black Widow on Disney+ with Premier Access has significantly enhanced her ability to earn additional compensation on top of the $20m she has received to date.”

Meanwhile, SAG-AFTRA president Gabrielle Carteris chimed in on Friday with a long statement criticizing Disney, indicating that the issue has struck a nerve at a time of uncertainty for the industry. She said Disney should be “ashamed” and slammed the “gendered-tone” of the company’s response.

“Scarlett Johansson is shining a white-hot spotlight on the improper shifts in compensation that companies are attempting to slip by talent as distribution models change,” Carteris said. “Nobody in any field of work should fall victim to surprise reductions in expected compensation. It is unreasonable and unjust. Disney and other content companies are doing very well and can certainly live up to their obligations to compensate the performers whose art and artistry are responsible for the corporation’s profits.”

“Women are not ‘callous’ when they stand up and fight for fair pay – they are leaders and champions for economic justice,” Carteris continued.

Despite Disney’s confidence, Johansson appears to be gaining popularity. Jason Blum praised Johansson’s boldness and called her case a battle for all talent. Meanwhile, the fact that additional Disney performers are considering suing Disney shows that this is not an isolated case, and Disney most certainly mismanaged contracts during the Covid-19 outbreak. This latest claim that Johansson is using public pressure to persuade Disney to pay a check she can’t legally receive is just another indication that the company should handle this better. Disney has constantly portrayed Johansson as someone who is just interested in making more money, although such charges are mostly baseless. The legal drama is likely to continue as we await Johansson’s team’s reaction to this fresh accusation. For the time being, it appears that Disney is more concerned with disproving the legal basis for Johansson’s Black Widow case than with how they behave themselves, and it remains to be seen how this will play out for them.