Or no Hobbits at all... - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Mithalwen · 02-12-2008, 07:12 AM

One thing I had been wondering generally was how long a "shelf life" the film rights had. Given that copyright on books and songs expire after a certain period of time it would seem unlikely that film rights could be held in perpetuity. Is there a general rule or would it be contract specific?

Lalwendë · 02-12-2008, 07:22 AM

It looks like there was a clause in the original sale which entitled the estate to a share of profits.

New Line don't sound like they're run by very clever people, do they? They've also had legal cases brought by Jackson, and by the actors, and they sold the foreign rights to The Golden Compass, which could have earned them a lot of money, especially now it's winning awards!

Azaelia of Willowbottom · 02-12-2008, 08:19 AM

What on earth is wrong with New Line? Lal must be right--the heads of the company must not be particularly bright. You'd think that after the actors sued, and Peter Jackson sued, they'd go through their records and make sure that everyone else had been paid their due so that they didn't get dragged back into court for the very same problem a third time. What's next? Are the gaffers and cinematographers, sound and CGI teams going to come out of the woodwork with a complaint that their contracts aren't being followed, either? Bad form, New Line.

...They must think they're above the law.

TH could still be made, just not by New Line, assuming this goes through. I'm not expecting it by 2010 anymore, that's for certain. *sigh*

Quempel · 02-12-2008, 09:29 AM

Ok I must be just not getting it. How can the Tolkien Estate stop the movie? They don't have the rights to the movie at all, but only rights to the profits from the movie...is this correct in my assumption?

And not that I believe NL wouldn't rip off the Estate, since they have a track record of ripping off everyone else. I am just wondering what legal leg they can stand on to claim stoppage of the The Hobbit, because it seems to me they don't have any rights to if the movie gets made, but only have rights to the profit of the movie, if and when it gets made.

My other question is this, once Christopher dies, who will be the 'Estate' that will stop the selling of the movie rights to the Sil? Because it seems that once he dies that the other children might not be such 'sticks in the mud' as it were.

William Cloud Hicklin · 02-12-2008, 10:01 AM

Quempel:

The doctrine invoked by the Estate (to the extent I can judge by the press reports) is that when a party to a contract breaches it materially, outrageously and in bad faith, the aggrieved party can ask the court to nullify the contract.

Let's look at it this way: suppose Farmer Jones contracts to sell this year's and next year's crop to a wholesaler. After Year 1 the wholesaler doesn't pay a penny- it's hardly unreasonable then for Farmer Jones not to give them Year 2's crop for nothing as well.

Mind you, this applies only to New Line- Saul Zaentz would still be free to license TH to any other studio. MGM/UA might be interested because they already own the distribution rights. And this other studio would be free to hire Peter Jackson if desired.

The Board of the Tolkien Estate* comprises Christopher, his wife Baillie, and JRRT's grandson Michael George Tolkien. All three appear to have the same attitude towards visual (as opposed to audio) adaptations. There's no telling in advance who might take up Christopher's vote on the board, but the most likely candidate is son Adam, whose position is also very book-centric and anti-exploitation.

*That's not strictly accurate- it's actually the board of The Tolkien Company Ltd, whereas the Estate is run by its executors, CRT and Cathleen Blackburn; and the Tolkien Trust has its own Board which includes JRRT's daughter Priscilla.

alatar · 02-12-2008, 11:50 AM

I don't know if it's the lawyers, accountants, the movie industry, etc (and I'm not tarring anyone who may be or be associated with such), but what fun seemingly can be had with reality in Hollywood. Remember the movie starring Eddie Murphy called Coming to America? Art Buchwald won a lawsuit against the studio as it was his idea that they stole. He was awarded damages on settlement of the appeal (or something). Anyway, the studio claimed that the movie never made a profit (though in the US alone it made $350 million), and so they could never pay up. You can read more here.

New Line may just be like everything else in that unreal world.

Sauron the White · 02-12-2008, 12:12 PM

I have a serious question about this development.

To what end (other than the obvious financial one) is The Tolkien Estate pursuing this? What is in it for them besides the $150 million that they feel they contractually deserve?

As I said in my first post, if the contract says they get the money then they certainly should get every penny they are owed. No problem there - at least from me. New Line has a had record of cheating nearly all concerned and it would not surprise me to find out the Tolkien Estate is in that line also.

I do find two things interesting about the money however. First, this is the first time I can remember hearing about a 7.5% profit sharing arrangement. Second, Jacksons attorneys used a figure of $4 billion US in revenues from the films and other sources. The Tolkien Estate figure of $6 billion is a good 33% higher than that. Why the difference?

But back to my main question....... what is the Tolkien Estate really angling to do here other than collect money? They want to strip New Line of the rights to both LOTR and HOBBIT. Okay. They flex some legal muscle and show they are no pansies. But if those rights go back to Saul Zaentz and he is free to sell them to anyone else, how does the Estate profit from that? What do they gain?

Or do they then claim in court that Zaentz failed to exercise some type of due dilligence or responsibility and he too should be stripped of those rights and they should revert totally to the Estate?

Unless that is the ultimate plan and goal, I suspect that what they gain is time. It would push back the two Middle earth films a good year or two and that may be important to them. I have thought all along that what the Estate resents most about these films is their success has supplanted the books in the minds of the world when it comes to what LORD OF THE RINGS is. The Ali G skit comes to mind where he attempts to sell a British publisher on the idea of "LOTR- the books" due to the films success. Shoving these two films even further on the back burner advances their goal of no more movies at all and only having the books out there.

If I am missing something, please respond.

02-12-2008, 07:12 AM	#1
Mithalwen Pilgrim Soul Join Date: May 2004 Location: watching the wonga-wonga birds circle... Posts: 9,460	One thing I had been wondering generally was how long a "shelf life" the film rights had. Given that copyright on books and songs expire after a certain period of time it would seem unlikely that film rights could be held in perpetuity. Is there a general rule or would it be contract specific? __________________ “But Finrod walks with Finarfin his father beneath the trees in Eldamar.” Christopher Tolkien, Requiescat in pace

02-12-2008, 07:22 AM	#2
Lalwendë A Mere Boggart Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: under the bed Posts: 4,737	It looks like there was a clause in the original sale which entitled the estate to a share of profits. New Line don't sound like they're run by very clever people, do they? They've also had legal cases brought by Jackson, and by the actors, and they sold the foreign rights to The Golden Compass, which could have earned them a lot of money, especially now it's winning awards! __________________ Gordon's alive!

02-12-2008, 08:19 AM	#3
Azaelia of Willowbottom Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: By the Sea Posts: 446	What on earth is wrong with New Line? Lal must be right--the heads of the company must not be particularly bright. You'd think that after the actors sued, and Peter Jackson sued, they'd go through their records and make sure that everyone else had been paid their due so that they didn't get dragged back into court for the very same problem a third time. What's next? Are the gaffers and cinematographers, sound and CGI teams going to come out of the woodwork with a complaint that their contracts aren't being followed, either? Bad form, New Line. ...They must think they're above the law. TH could still be made, just not by New Line, assuming this goes through. I'm not expecting it by 2010 anymore, that's for certain. sigh __________________ "Wherever I have been, I am back."

02-12-2008, 09:29 AM	#4
Quempel Haunting Spirit Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: In a flower Posts: 97	Ok I must be just not getting it. How can the Tolkien Estate stop the movie? They don't have the rights to the movie at all, but only rights to the profits from the movie...is this correct in my assumption? And not that I believe NL wouldn't rip off the Estate, since they have a track record of ripping off everyone else. I am just wondering what legal leg they can stand on to claim stoppage of the The Hobbit, because it seems to me they don't have any rights to if the movie gets made, but only have rights to the profit of the movie, if and when it gets made. My other question is this, once Christopher dies, who will be the 'Estate' that will stop the selling of the movie rights to the Sil? Because it seems that once he dies that the other children might not be such 'sticks in the mud' as it were. __________________ Lurking behind Uncle Fester

02-12-2008, 10:01 AM	#5
William Cloud Hicklin Loremaster of Annúminas Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 2,330	Quempel: The doctrine invoked by the Estate (to the extent I can judge by the press reports) is that when a party to a contract breaches it materially, outrageously and in bad faith, the aggrieved party can ask the court to nullify the contract. Let's look at it this way: suppose Farmer Jones contracts to sell this year's and next year's crop to a wholesaler. After Year 1 the wholesaler doesn't pay a penny- it's hardly unreasonable then for Farmer Jones not to give them Year 2's crop for nothing as well. Mind you, this applies only to New Line- Saul Zaentz would still be free to license TH to any other studio. MGM/UA might be interested because they already own the distribution rights. And this other studio would be free to hire Peter Jackson if desired. The Board of the Tolkien Estate* comprises Christopher, his wife Baillie, and JRRT's grandson Michael George Tolkien. All three appear to have the same attitude towards visual (as opposed to audio) adaptations. There's no telling in advance who might take up Christopher's vote on the board, but the most likely candidate is son Adam, whose position is also very book-centric and anti-exploitation. That's not strictly accurate- it's actually the board of The Tolkien Company Ltd, whereas the Estate is run by its executors, CRT and Cathleen Blackburn; and the Tolkien Trust has its own Board which includes JRRT's daughter Priscilla. __________________ The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it.* Last edited by William Cloud Hicklin; 02-12-2008 at 10:06 AM.

02-12-2008, 11:50 AM	#6
alatar Doubting Dwimmerlaik Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Heaven's basement Posts: 2,466	I don't know if it's the lawyers, accountants, the movie industry, etc (and I'm not tarring anyone who may be or be associated with such), but what fun seemingly can be had with reality in Hollywood. Remember the movie starring Eddie Murphy called Coming to America? Art Buchwald won a lawsuit against the studio as it was his idea that they stole. He was awarded damages on settlement of the appeal (or something). Anyway, the studio claimed that the movie never made a profit (though in the US alone it made $350 million), and so they could never pay up. You can read more here. New Line may just be like everything else in that unreal world. __________________ There is naught that you can do, other than to resist, with hope or without it.

02-12-2008, 12:12 PM	#7
Sauron the White Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 903	I have a serious question about this development. To what end (other than the obvious financial one) is The Tolkien Estate pursuing this? What is in it for them besides the $150 million that they feel they contractually deserve? As I said in my first post, if the contract says they get the money then they certainly should get every penny they are owed. No problem there - at least from me. New Line has a had record of cheating nearly all concerned and it would not surprise me to find out the Tolkien Estate is in that line also. I do find two things interesting about the money however. First, this is the first time I can remember hearing about a 7.5% profit sharing arrangement. Second, Jacksons attorneys used a figure of $4 billion US in revenues from the films and other sources. The Tolkien Estate figure of $6 billion is a good 33% higher than that. Why the difference? But back to my main question....... what is the Tolkien Estate really angling to do here other than collect money? They want to strip New Line of the rights to both LOTR and HOBBIT. Okay. They flex some legal muscle and show they are no pansies. But if those rights go back to Saul Zaentz and he is free to sell them to anyone else, how does the Estate profit from that? What do they gain? Or do they then claim in court that Zaentz failed to exercise some type of due dilligence or responsibility and he too should be stripped of those rights and they should revert totally to the Estate? Unless that is the ultimate plan and goal, I suspect that what they gain is time. It would push back the two Middle earth films a good year or two and that may be important to them. I have thought all along that what the Estate resents most about these films is their success has supplanted the books in the minds of the world when it comes to what LORD OF THE RINGS is. The Ali G skit comes to mind where he attempts to sell a British publisher on the idea of "LOTR- the books" due to the films success. Shoving these two films even further on the back burner advances their goal of no more movies at all and only having the books out there. If I am missing something, please respond.