From what this says, it looks like they are most likely going to make a deal. Neither company wants to lose money, and FOX has forced WB to lose some one way or another. So instead of taking a complete loss, WB is more likely going to give FOX some portion of the profit so that they can both make money. (Even though FOX does NOT deserve a penny!)
I don't agree that you can't sue unless you are about to make money. What determines the criteria for "about to make money"? I believe you can sue anyone that has acted upon something they did not have the rights to. You can sue even if they make no money from it. (I could be wrong about this, but I know they could have sued earlier either way, I mean the point of filming a movie is to make money, regardless of what stage the filming is in). But either way, they are suing them now and that means that WB and FOX have to settle or risk losing a lot more money.
FOX has already lost face with me, after pulling this kind of stunt and going to court and demanding that they pull the movie.
I think that this WILL delay the movie, but that they will also strike a deal.
We will most likely see this released in the summer or fall of 2009.
Congratulations. You have no clue what you're talking about.
I'm sure if it was you being ripped off by someone, you'd have very different feelings.
Release or not my life will go on. I feel sorry for those that work on the movie if it get's delayed. If it get's release I will go see it, if it's deleayed no big deal I can wait for it. I got bigger things to worry about than this.
This is why it will be released on time. This is not a Superman, Spiderman or Batman type of property. It you don't release it on time the interest built up about the project will start to dissapate and then only the true Fanboys will end up going to see it. (Not that there's anything wrong with Fanboys, I've been accused of being one more than once!) WB and Fox will both end up losing out on some serious cash if it ends up being pushed back.
I think WB believed they had the rights to this free and clear when they started production on this movie. As it turns out the people they bought it from did not exercise an option and the rights actually went back to Fox. Both companies believed they had the rights secured, but as it turns out Fox was right, and thanks to someone at WB not doing their job completely WB is going to have to pay for that.
Warner actually owns the property, so I don't see why there's a problem
they own the property, but do not own any rights to distribute the film. fox owns that right. warner infringed on that right so fox sued. easy as that.
I think WB believed they had the rights to this free and clear when they started production on this movie. As it turns out the people they bought it from did not exercise an option and the rights actually went back to Fox. Both companies believed they had the rights secured, but as it turns out Fox was right, and thanks to someone at WB not doing their job completely WB is going to have to pay for that.
This is the actual reason. I was going to say this and find the article that stated this, but Memnock beat me to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd
they own the property, but do not own any rights to distribute the film. fox owns that right. warner infringed on that right so fox sued. easy as that.
Fox was seeking to enjoin Warner Bros from going forward with the project, and U.S. District Court Judge Gary Allen Feess on Friday refused to dismiss the lawsuit filed by Fox on February 12th of this year. "In essence, the Judge appears to conclude that Fox retained distribution rights in Watchmen through the 1991 Largo quitclaim, and he concludes that, under the 1994 turnaround, producer Larry Gordon acquired an option to acquire Fox's remaining interest in Watchmen that was never exercised, thereby leaving Fox with its rights under the 1994 agreement," a 20th Century Fox source just told me. "While the Judge's opinion is preliminary and his views could change in the course of the litigation, his current take on the facts is consistent with our position." I'm told the court is still contemplating Fox's motion for an injunction. This is indeed a stunning development which could imperil Warner Bros' entire 2009 movie slate. Sources point out to me that Warner Bros had a similar problem with the Dukes Of Hazzard movie before Judge Feess and had to pay tens of millions of dollars to release the film.
In the lawsuit, 20th Century Fox contends that it owns the distribution rights to any motion picture based on Watchmen and argues that it has held these rights for almost two decades based on agreements with producer Larry Gordon and his related business entities. Fox asserts claims against Warner Bros and its affiliates for copyright infringement and interference with Fox’s contract rights under a 1991 agreement with Gordon’s affiliate. Warner Bros moved to dismiss the copyright and interference with contract claims, arguing that it has obtained all rights to produce and distribute the movie from Gordon or one of his companies, and that its acquisition of these rights can be traced through documents. So Warner Bros asked the Court on the basis of those agreements to dismiss Fox’s claims. Warner Bros also asserts that Fox abandoned any interest it had in Watchmen in 1991 when it purportedly quitclaimed its distribution rights to Gordon according to what the court acknowledged was "a very complex, convoluted series of negotiations and agreements".
Last edited by scweb13; 12-29-2008 at 06:44 PM.
Reason: updated with original article
warner should never assume anything though. they should have done a thorough check before proceeding on with this. they didn't and now they're screwed. what you do comes back at you. in this case it really does.
Actually, the problem comes upon distribution, not when you start making income. For example. if I rip off Spider-man and give away my own comic for free, Marvel could still sue me.
As soon as Warner Bros. started putting out trailers and promotional material, that's when Fox should have sued, at least speaking of the matter in that way.
And actually, you can sue whenever you want for whatever reason you want. If it's not legitimate, it would get thrown out by the courts, but you can file whatever stupid lawsuits you might want for literally any reason.
Anyway, my feeling is that squatters shouldn't have any right. If they're not going to make use of the property, they have no right refusing the right of another individual or group (I mean, they DO have LEGAL right, I mean they don't have moral right). This applies to all things everywhere. You know, there are companies that buy up patents and just sit on them, waiting for someone to make something similar, so they can sue them and make money that way. That's REALLY messed up.
Fox did file a lawsuit when the trailers released. Hence why the original release was in december of this year not March of next. All said and done, Warner Brothers is big and should have settled this long before.
As for Warner Brothers making better Comc movies, they made two of late and Superman Returns was extremely disappointing.
Ok, I have seen a lot of back and forth, with people not really understanding the details of what happened, so I figured that I would give a synopsis, for all who missed the details,
(I saw earlier someone even tried to blame the director (Zack Snyder), just so you know, directors have nothing to do with securing movie rights.)
--------
In August 1986, producer Lawrence Gordon acquired film rights to Watchmen for 20th Century Fox.
Fox put the project into turnaround in 1991, and made a deal with Lawrence Gordon in 1994 whereby Gordon was given the rights to watchmen.
Fox alledges that this deal still gave them the option of retaining distribution and sequel rights to the film, and a share of the profits, should it be made by any other studio.
Despite originally passing on the project, Fox also alleged that its agreement with Gordon contained a "changed elements" clause, meaning that if Gordon changed any of the key creative personnel on the film, Fox would have first option on participation. The studio said that Gordon did not inform them of Snyder's joining the production in 2005.
Fox's interpretation of the 1994 turnaround deal also meant that Gordon would not fully control the rights until the studio's development costs (estimated by Fox at $1 million) had been reimbursed.
After Fox, Watchmen went through many studios.
After Fox's turndown in 1991, Gordon set up the project at a new company, Largo International. Fox would distribute the film. Largo closed three years later, and the above mentioned deal was made regarding the rights in 1994.
Gordon and Silver then set up the project at Warner Bros., where Terry Gilliam was attached to direct. Gilliam abandoned the project due to these funding problems, and also decided that Watchmen would have been unfilmable.
In October 2001, Gordon and Universal Studios signed screenwriter David Hayter to write and direct Watchmen in a "seven-figure deal". Hayter and the producers left Universal due to creative differences, and in October 2003, Gordon and Levin expressed interest in setting up Watchmen at Revolution Studios. They had completed Hellboy at Revolution, and were intending to shoot in Prague. The project did not hold together at Revolution Studios and subsequently fell apart.
In July 2004, it was announced Paramount Pictures would produce Watchmen, and they attached Darren Aronofsky to direct Hayter's script. Producers Gordon and Levin remained attached, collaborating with Aronofsky's producing partner, Eric Watson. But Aronofsky left to focus on The Fountain. Paramount replaced him with Paul Greengrass and set up a target summer 2006 release date. In March 2005, Paramount's CEO Donald De Line was rumored to depart from the studio, endangering high-profile projects including Watchmen. Earlier that week, De Line was in London, urging a reduction in Watchmen's budget so the film could get the greenlight. As a result of the potential budget cut with the new CEO Brad Grey, Levin planned to move the project from Pinewood Studios (where it was going to be shot), hoping to curb the budget by filming outside the UK. Ultimately, Paramount placed Watchmen in turnaround.
In October 2005, Gordon and Levin were in talks with Warner Bros., originally the second studio to be attached to Watchmen. In December 2005, the producers were confirmed to have set up the project at Warner Bros., but Greengrass was no longer attached to the project. In addition, the film was marked an "open writing assignment", which meant David Hayter's script would be put aside. After Warner Bros. officially became involved, the studio claimed that because Paramount had not fully reimbursed Universal for its development costs, Paramount had no legal claim over the film rights. Therefore, it would not be entitled to co-finance the film with Warner Bros. After negotiations between the studios, they agreed that Paramount would own 25% of the film and would distribute it outside North America.
---------------------
SUMMARY
---------------------
So Warner Brothers optioned the rights for Watchmen from producer Lawrence Gordon who originally got the rights in August 1986 and is producing the 2009 movie. The film had gone through 5 other studios since Fox and still had the same producer, who had paperwork saying that he had the rights to Watchmen. The legal fight is basically over the 1994 deal between Lawrence Gordon and Fox, where Fox claims that they put in sub-clauses allowing them first option on participation. WB would have had no way of knowing this, and being how many different studios tried to do this movie - I doubt anyone but Fox and Lawrence Gordon knew of this contract and Lawrence Gordon might have actually thought that he did have all the rights.
So, if there is fault, it falls on:
1. Lawrence Gordon - He should have read the contracts and known all of the stipulations, and double checked to make sure that Fox didn't slide something in.
2. Fox - For nitpicking, and trying to prolong the situation rather than working toward a quick resolution. Even if they don't have the rights that they claim and lose in court, They have the money and lawyers to appeal, and drag this out as long as they want. Right now, they aren't offering anything to make this go away, which is a bit of an unreeasonable stance to take. I can understand that they believe that they have some rights to this film, but by refusing to negotiate, they are only hurting the fans and themselves (they didn't have to front any of the production costs or risk associated with the movie).
Last edited by arrow61095; 12-29-2008 at 09:36 PM.
All I know is that when the year is over they media reports about the "box office numbers" for the year. Not which studios. I don't think it will be as big as TDK or Iron Man but I think it will make a much larger chunk of money then some people give it credit for. I think if it gets held up it just hurts the industry as a whole in a time when they need money and bigger movies at the theater and the money from the DVD/Blu sales. I'm just glad the actors and film crews got paid, they did their job.
Ok, I have seen a lot of back and forth, with people not really understanding the details of what happened, so I figured that I would give a synopsis, for all who missed the details,
(I saw earlier someone even tried to blame the director (Zack Snyder), just so you know, directors have nothing to do with securing movie rights.)
--------
In August 1986, producer Lawrence Gordon acquired film rights to Watchmen for 20th Century Fox.
Fox put the project into turnaround in 1991, and made a deal with Lawrence Gordon in 1994 whereby Gordon was given the rights to watchmen.
Fox alledges that this deal still gave them the option of retaining distribution and sequel rights to the film, and a share of the profits, should it be made by any other studio.
Despite originally passing on the project, Fox also alleged that its agreement with Gordon contained a "changed elements" clause, meaning that if Gordon changed any of the key creative personnel on the film, Fox would have first option on participation. The studio said that Gordon did not inform them of Snyder's joining the production in 2005.
Fox's interpretation of the 1994 turnaround deal also meant that Gordon would not fully control the rights until the studio's development costs (estimated by Fox at $1 million) had been reimbursed.
After Fox, Watchmen went through many studios.
After Fox's turndown in 1991, Gordon set up the project at a new company, Largo International. Fox would distribute the film. Largo closed three years later, and the above mentioned deal was made regarding the rights in 1994.
Gordon and Silver then set up the project at Warner Bros., where Terry Gilliam was attached to direct. Gilliam abandoned the project due to these funding problems, and also decided that Watchmen would have been unfilmable.
In October 2001, Gordon and Universal Studios signed screenwriter David Hayter to write and direct Watchmen in a "seven-figure deal". Hayter and the producers left Universal due to creative differences, and in October 2003, Gordon and Levin expressed interest in setting up Watchmen at Revolution Studios. They had completed Hellboy at Revolution, and were intending to shoot in Prague. The project did not hold together at Revolution Studios and subsequently fell apart.
In July 2004, it was announced Paramount Pictures would produce Watchmen, and they attached Darren Aronofsky to direct Hayter's script. Producers Gordon and Levin remained attached, collaborating with Aronofsky's producing partner, Eric Watson. But Aronofsky left to focus on The Fountain. Paramount replaced him with Paul Greengrass and set up a target summer 2006 release date. In March 2005, Paramount's CEO Donald De Line was rumored to depart from the studio, endangering high-profile projects including Watchmen. Earlier that week, De Line was in London, urging a reduction in Watchmen's budget so the film could get the greenlight. As a result of the potential budget cut with the new CEO Brad Grey, Levin planned to move the project from Pinewood Studios (where it was going to be shot), hoping to curb the budget by filming outside the UK. Ultimately, Paramount placed Watchmen in turnaround.
In October 2005, Gordon and Levin were in talks with Warner Bros., originally the second studio to be attached to Watchmen. In December 2005, the producers were confirmed to have set up the project at Warner Bros., but Greengrass was no longer attached to the project. In addition, the film was marked an "open writing assignment", which meant David Hayter's script would be put aside. After Warner Bros. officially became involved, the studio claimed that because Paramount had not fully reimbursed Universal for its development costs, Paramount had no legal claim over the film rights. Therefore, it would not be entitled to co-finance the film with Warner Bros. After negotiations between the studios, they agreed that Paramount would own 25% of the film and would distribute it outside North America.
---------------------
SUMMARY
---------------------
So Warner Brothers optioned the rights for Watchmen from producer Lawrence Gordon who originally got the rights in August 1986 and is producing the 2009 movie. The film had gone through 5 other studios since Fox and still had the same producer, who had paperwork saying that he had the rights to Watchmen. The legal fight is basically over the 1994 deal between Lawrence Gordon and Fox, where Fox claims that they put in sub-clauses allowing them first option on participation. WB would have had no way of knowing this, and being how many different studios tried to do this movie - I doubt anyone but Fox and Lawrence Gordon knew of this contract and Lawrence Gordon might have actually thought that he did have all the rights.
So, if there is fault, it falls on:
1. Lawrence Gordon - He should have read the contracts and known all of the stipulations, and double checked to make sure that Fox didn't slide something in.
2. Fox - For nitpicking, and trying to prolong the situation rather than working toward a quick resolution. Even if they don't have the rights that they claim and lose in court, They have the money and lawyers to appeal, and drag this out as long as they want. Right now, they aren't offering anything to make this go away, which is a bit of an unreeasonable stance to take. I can understand that they believe that they have some rights to this film, but by refusing to negotiate, they are only hurting the fans and themselves (they didn't have to front any of the production costs or risk associated with the movie).
Actually Snynder, Warner Bros etc are just as fault as Gordon. Maybe not leagally but morally for Synder at least. They should have looked over the contracts and rights before they signed anything and went into preproduction. I think as we get closer to January 20th a deal will break out were it will be a joint venure of Fox and Warner Brothers where Fox maybe get a 60/40 profit split.
If the trail begins, then expect a delay and temporary shelving of the movie.
So since the judge has issued his order, there is no trial unless WB appeals. Latest is Fox is looking for an order to delay the release. Here's another article:
Quote:
An unnerving update on the Watchmen legal battle has arrived today courtesy of the AP. An attorney for 20th Century Fox told them that "the studio will continue to seek an order delaying the release of Watchmen." And on the other side, an attorney for Warner Brothers also told them that "he didn't know if an appeal was coming, but thinks a trial is necessary and a settlement unlikely." While it wouldn't be right of me to jump to conclusions, this seems to be getting worse every day. Naysayers believe this will be settled quickly, but news like this obviously shows that Fox and Warner Brothers don't want that.
We still don't know what this means for Watchmen, as we only get tidbits of news like this randomly. On Christmas Eve, we reported that Judge Feess had ruled that "Fox owns a copyright interest consisting of, at the very least, the right to distribute the Watchmen motion picture." However, Feess has said today that he plans to hold a trial on January 20th to decide on remaining issues. While Feess did make that previous statement in a five-page written order released last week, it's obvious that Warner Brothers still wants to fight this and will probably file an appeal soon in hopes of keeping the March release date.
Those of you that think this is going to be solved quickly and Fox will just get their logo slapped on the front of Watchmen are very wrong. I'm not a lawyer, but it's not too hard to tell that this isn't just an open-close kind of court case. Obviously Warner Brothers is going to fight tooth and nail for this, just as I would, because they're the ones who made it what it is and they're the ones who have supported it all along. Fox doesn't deserve a single penny, or so I believe, and I'll be supporting Warner Brothers to the end. Who knows what is going to happen next, but you can be certain we'll be following this to the very end.
So since the judge has issued his order, there is no trial unless WB appeals. Latest is Fox is looking for an order to delay the release. Here's another article:
*Reads the Article*
And yet another clueless web person chimes in on stuff they're ignorant of.
"Fox doesn't deserve a single penny, or so I believe, and I'll be supporting Warner Brothers to the end."
No, they deserve a whole lotta pennies. And are going to get what is owed them. WB can suck it.
Not sure where the whole "no trial unless WB files an appeal" comes in, this is from the source that the above article was based on:
Quote:
LOS ANGELES – An attorney for 20th Century Fox says the studio will continue to seek an order delaying the release of 'Watchmen.'
U.S. District Court Judge Gary Feess last week agreed with Fox that Warner Bros. had infringed its copyright by developing and shooting the superhero flick, scheduled for release March 6.
Feess said Monday he plans to hold a trial Jan. 20 to decide remaining issues.
Fox claims it never fully relinquished story rights from its deal made in the late 1980s, and sued Warner Bros. in February. Warner Bros. contended Fox isn't entitled to distribution.
Warner Bros.' attorney said Monday he didn't know if an appeal was coming, but thinks a trial is necessary and a settlement unlikely.
I think the pro-WB folks know what Fox is doing is within their own legal rights, I think people just think it was a very sh*tty thing to do.
As someone in page 1 has said
Quote:
Anyway, my feeling is that squatters shouldn't have any right. If they're not going to make use of the property, they have no right refusing the right of another individual or group (I mean, they DO have LEGAL right, I mean they don't have moral right). This applies to all things everywhere. You know, there are companies that buy up patents and just sit on them, waiting for someone to make something similar, so they can sue them and make money that way. That's REALLY messed up.
And I mostly concur.
Also doesn't WB own the rights to make all DC material anyway? Could this be their only chance of winning this case? Or did I dream that last night?
And yet another clueless web person chimes in on stuff they're ignorant of.
"Fox doesn't deserve a single penny, or so I believe, and I'll be supporting Warner Brothers to the end."
No, they deserve a whole lotta pennies. And are going to get what is owed them. WB can suck it.
I take it you don't like WB?
Have you even read some of the other articles posted? Read Arrow61095 post. Particularly the summary.
If Fox blocks (not delays) the release Watchmen, they will never receive the other half of the rights to the Batman TV series. I posted an article that stated that this was one of the reasons for the lawsuit.
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
Linear Mode
