Film Rights to First & Second Age

[Sauron the White]

from WCH

So, a prima facie declaration that The Silmarillion was a separate work with an independent existence- and moreover, one which everyone even dimly aware of Tolkien in the late 60s knew was supposed to be nearing completion.

I remember The Shadow used to proclaim "who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows." I guess he had nothing on you. By the way, when you are not looking into the future expecting your contractual partners to screw you, could you define "to be nearing completion"? By your own timeline there was a good ten years between when everybody was suppose to know these things and when the SIL was published. But it makes no difference. None. Zip. Nada.

from Nerwen

I just want to know whether, in your mind, we have or have not disposed of the copyright question? Can we get a definite answer from you on this one?

Mr. Hicklin is attempting to soften or mitigate his previous firm statement that there is no difference - NONE - between what I called a copyright and what I called a legal registered copyright. When I quoted the link where it said that one can gain additional damages from statuatory law, that one can gain repayment attorneys fees, and one can use the filing as evidence - and I take that to mean they save tons of work producing other proof in court - those are definite differences that go beyond the limited word PROCEDURAL. The link that you provided clearly spells out some additional benefits one can gain from taking the steps and spending the money to get a registered copyright. And I believe we have disposed of the copyright question and it has no impact on my main point either way.

I never ever ever claimed that the Tolkien Estate or CT did not have the right to have the SIL published as a book. Never.

The value of the rights held by the legal film rights holders were severly diminished by actions taken by CT with the publication of the SIL.

from WCH -

In any event, the synopsis in the Appendices does not purport to be 'The Silmarillion.' By its own terms,

So what?
It does list a whole bunch of First Age historical events which it says are taken from The Silmarillion. Where else in 1969 could you pick up a published book by JRRT and find that information? And it all was sold to UA in film rights. LOTR is much more than the story that ends with Sam going back announcing his return safe and sound. Its also the Appendicies.

UA wanted the Lord of the Rings. They didn't care about The Silmarillion.

How do you "know" for certain what UA wanted?
What I know for a fact that does not depend on some mystical powers or abstract reasoning is this: UA bought the films rights to LOTR from JRRT and gained the film rights to everything in that book including the Appendicies. They gained the usage of a whole list of events from the First Age that JRRT says are part of The Silmarillion. They gained the right to use those in a film.

It is foolish and silly to speculate and argue about what somebody wanted and what you may know about it. Lets look at the facts. The facts say what happened.

In 1969 there existed no bloody work titled the SILMARILLION outside of stacks of unsorted and sometimes unreadable papers strewn around various locations where JRRT worked. It may have existed in his mind. Fragments may have existed on scraps of paper. But THE SILMARILLION as an identifiable work that UA or anyone else (beyond some Tolkien groupies) would know about did not exist to be bought, stolen or anything else.

You make it sound like the first page of Appendix A was the purpose of UA's purchase!

It matters not one jot or tittle what UA 's purpose or motive was in their purchase. I could not care less if they were more concerned about page 7, 353, 869 or 1012. It matters not. They bought the whole darned thing lock stock and barrel. They bought film rights to LOTR from cover to cover and that includes the whole contents including the Appendicies.

I have tried to answer all your questions. Would you please be good enough to answer this for me that I have posed before?

Do you know of any other situation in publishing or in film rights where someone made a legal purchase of film rights and then, years later, some of those same contents were repackaged and sold in a longer format thus weakening the usability and exercise of rights of the original sale?

Because I know of not one situation like that. I spent several hours researching this to find out if there was precedent for it and cannot find one case where anyone did that.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Mr. Hicklin is attempting to soften or mitigate his previous firm statement that there is no difference - NONE - between what I called a copyright and what I called a legal registered copyright. When I quoted the link where it said that one can gain additional damages from statuatory law, that one can gain repayment attorneys fees, and one can use the filing as evidence - and I take that to mean they save tons of work producing other proof in court - those are definite differences that go beyond the limited word PROCEDURAL. The link that you provided clearly spells out some additional benefits one can gain from taking the steps and spending the money to get a registered copyright. And I believe we have disposed of the copyright question and it has no impact on my main point either way.

For the last time, Sauron– the creator of a work owns the copyright by default. This right exists as soon as the work is created. Registering copyright only helps facilitate things.

That is what that link is saying. You have had this explained to you over and over again. Why can't you just admit you were wrong? People can be wrong sometimes– it's no disgrace.

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

I never ever ever claimed that the Tolkien Estate or CT did not have the right to have the SIL published as a book. Never.

Actually, I believe you are claiming that, if you think the film rights holders can sue Tolkien Estate for damages caused by publishing The Silmarillion. Isn't that the cornerstone of your argument?

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Do you know of any other situation in publishing or in film rights where someone made a legal purchase of film rights and then, years later, some of those same contents were repackaged and sold in a longer format thus weakening the usability and exercise of rights of the original sale?

Because I know of not one situation like that. I spent several hours researching this to find out if there was precedent for it and cannot find one case where anyone did that.

I think you just shot yourself in the foot. What you have proved, if anything, is that no film company has ever tried to sue an author for publishing a sequel (or prequel) to his own novel. I don't know if this is so– but if it is– well, why do you think?

[Sauron the White]

Nerwen
It seems to me that the actual truth is somewhere in the middle. WCH claimed that there was absolutely no difference between the home created copyright when the work was created and a legally registered copyright. The link you provided explains several differences that I have repeatedly pointed to. Those include additional damages, repayment of attorney fees and the ability to introduce the filing as evidence thereby saving lots of other work.

Mr. Hicklin was wrong in claiming that there was no difference. Then he attempted to mitigate or soften his claim calling those differences (which previously DID NOT EXIST in his opinion) procedural. I also was wrong about some things. The truth lies somewhere in between.

Originally Posted by Sauron the White
I never ever ever claimed that the Tolkien Estate or CT did not have the right to have the SIL published as a book. Never.

from Nerwen

Actually, I believe you are claiming that, if you think the film rights holders can sue Tolkien Estate for damages caused by publishing The Silmarillion. Isn't that the cornerstone of your argument?

Its a free country so you can believe anything you darn well please. That changes nothing I said. Believe away. Please show me where I said the film rights holders can sue the Tolkien Estate for damages caused by publishing THE SIL. Please show me. I never said it. Some type of action may have come up in the discussion in passing over the last three pages but that was never my point. And if I never said it it cannot be the cornerstone of my argument. This is not about litigation or lawsuits.

What you have proved, if anything, is that no film company has ever tried to sue an author for publishing a sequel (or prequel) to his own novel. I don't know if this is so– but if it is– well, why do you think?

I have no idea of what you are saying here or what your point is because you are completly missing my point. I am not saying and have never said that no author cannot write a prequel to an existing story or a sequel to an existing story. If I did please show me where I said it. I have never talked about suing an author for doing that. If I did please show me where I did.

My point and my question was this: can anyone please show me evidence of another case where an author sold a piece of his work to a film company and then used that exact same work in an expanded form to cause diminshment of the original film holders rights?

I spent a couple of hours researching this yesterday and could find no other case.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

In 1969 there existed no bloody work titled the SILMARILLION outside of stacks of unsorted and sometimes unreadable papers strewn around various locations where JRRT worked. It may have existed in his mind. Fragments may have existed on scraps of paper. But THE SILMARILLION as an identifiable work that UA or anyone else (beyond some Tolkien groupies) would know about did not exist to be bought, stolen or anything else.

You see, copyright does matter– despite your own statements to the contrary. Tolkien owned the copyright on his work as soon as he wrote it. Publication has nothing to do with it. This is the basic point which you refuse to accept.

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

I have tried to answer all your questions. Would you please be good enough to answer this for me that I have posed before?

Do you know of any other situation in publishing or in film rights where someone made a legal purchase of film rights and then, years later, some of those same contents were repackaged and sold in a longer format thus weakening the usability and exercise of rights of the original sale?

Because I know of not one situation like that. I spent several hours researching this to find out if there was precedent for it and cannot find one case where anyone did that.

But that's not what happened. The Silmarillion is not an expansion of the LotR Appendices. They are a synopsis of it. J.R.R. Tolkien owned the copyright on the Simarillion material from the moment he wrote it. He did, Sauron. He really, really did. Your personal beliefs do not change this in the slightest.

And while we're on the subject of belief:

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Its a free country so you can believe anything you darn well please. That changes nothing I said. Believe away. Please show me where I said the film rights holders can sue the Tolkien Estate for damages caused by publishing THE SIL. Please show me. I never said it. Some type of action may have come up in the discussion in passing over the last three pages but that was never my point. And if I never said it it cannot be the cornerstone of my argument. This is not about litigation or lawsuits.

Here we go again. Will you kindly explain what your argument is?

You say it's not about who owns the rights. You say it's not about whether the rights holders can sue for damages.

Then what is it?

Edit: Another thing: How do you think registering copyright affects an author's ownership of his work?

Don't say this doesn't matter– you've been arguing on this issue for ages.

[davem]

Lets see if I get this right. UA was suppose to look into the future and know that JRRT would someday publish a book that he had been working on for decades and decades and was in little better condition that stacks of unsorted papers and notes? They were suppose to know, that somehow, someway, someday, JRRT or his heirs would undercut their investment by putting out another book with much the same material that they had paid him for? Or, they should have been aware of a rather obscure article turned into a book about the subject and been able to predict the future from that?

" in little better condition that stacks of unsorted papers and notes" could describe the manuscripts of many authors pre-word-processors. And how many studios have bought the movie rights of forthcoming books? And even if we were to sympathise with that well-known humanitarian organisation United Artists because they didn't get around to asking Tolkien whether he was going to actually publish this 'Silmarillion' thing (probably the board of directors was too busy going out on the streets & handing out soup & sandwiches to the homeless or something), Saul Zaentz could have easily found out (it being, as WCH has pointed out, widely known throughout the '60's he was working on it) if he'd taken the time - Tolkien never made any secret of his desire to publish it. To continue his example - you purchase one acre of land from him but fail to ask what plans, if any, he has for the rest of it. He has actually published out his plans to turn the rest of the land into a 'hog-farm/sewage treatment plant/toxic waste dump' - in fact, on the one acre of land (LotR) you bought there was actually a big sign stating 'This land to over look a new hog-farm/sewage treatment plant/toxic waste dump' (the clear statement/wide knowledge that The Sil was a work in progress). You, in your eagerness to buy the acre of land, simply ignore the sign & also fail to ask what plans the owner has for the rest of the site.

The other point I would make is that Zaentz has never cared whether his licensing of trashy cartoons, action figures & general tat might adversely affect the reputation/perception of the Estate's property (ie Tolkien's writings). Do you think that in return for access to use some of Tolkien's unpublished work Zaentz would let the Estate have a say in what was licensed - or would this all be one way traffic?