Subject for the Second film?

[Sauron the White]

That is a great spot to be in. Sounds like a great job.

One thing that I am not clear about. The game is licensed by Saul Zaentz through rights he has purchased from UA decades ago. Even if the license the game people have prohibit the mention of certain First and Second Age things, why would that necesarrily mean that the rights Zaentz posesses would limit him in the same way? It could simply mean that Zaentz wants to limit the scope of rights to others and he himself is not under the same limitations.

Or the limitations placed on the games license could simply be to limit the scope of content to events already in the films and Zaentz or New Line does not want new ground covered if they themselves have not yet done it.

All this is theory of course.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

That is a great spot to be in. Sounds like a great job.

It was not a job, it was a misadventure. Actually, I was offered a position as a Tolkien quest-writer in-game by Turbine (the company that produces Lord of the Rings Online); however, I declined as it would have moved me to another state and would have only been a temporary position in any case. I suppose I might have jumped on it if I were younger and without a family, but that was not in the equation.

In addition, I got physically ill at the lore atrocities evident in every fiber of the game, and have not played since prior to the game's official release due to mental health considerations (thus retaining what little sanity I still have).

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

One thing that I am not clear about. The game is licensed by Saul Zaentz through rights he has purchased from UA decades ago. Even if the license the game people have prohibit the mention of certain First and Second Age things, why would that necesarrily mean that the rights Zaentz posesses would limit him in the same way? It could simply mean that Zaentz wants to limit the scope of rights to others and he himself is not under the same limitations.

Or the limitations placed on the games license could simply be to limit the scope of content to events already in the films and Zaentz or New Line does not want new ground covered if they themselves have not yet done it.

All this is theory of course.

Okay here are the licensing commandments as I now understand them:

1) If references appear only in the Lord of the Rings or The Hobbit, thou shalt use them.

2) If references appear in both the actual text of LotR and TH, and in The Silmarillion (or other Tolkien publication controlled by the Tolkien Family Trust, such as UT or HoMe), thou shalt use them.

3) If references appear in The Silmarillion or other Tolkien publication, but not in LotR or TH, thou shalt not use them.

4) If references appear in the LotR Appendices, but not in The Silmarillion or other Tolkien publication, thou shalt use them.

5) If references appear in the LotR Appendices, and in The Silmarillion or other Tolkien publication, but do not appear in the actual text of LotR or TH, thou shalt not use them.

Again, as you pointed out Mr. White, this may merely be a measure of control Tolkien Enterprises has exerted on the users of the gaming license (in this case Turbine, but also Electronic Arts, which controls the X-Box and PSP gaming license); however, as litigious as the Tolkien Family Trust is known to be (as you know, they are currently suing Newline... http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/bu...vie.html?fta=y), it is perhaps wise on Tolkien Ent's part to ensure that there is not the slightest hint of impropriety in their handling of their licenses in regards to the exclusive rights Tolkien Family Trust exerts over what remains of Tolkien's legacy. Or, perhaps more to the point, they are limited by copyright law against using references to The Silmarillion (unless specified) within their license.

After all, even though Tolkien Enterprise's licensing rights are granted in perpetuity, they can be revoked by the courts (which I am sure would please Christopher Tolkien, and be the crowning achievement of his curmudgeonly struggle for control of his father's legacy).

P.S. It is interesting to note that Games Workshops PLC is the only company currently that holds permissions from both Tolkien Enterprises and the Tolkien Family Trust to merchandise products. The permissions granted by the Tolkien Family Trust is limited to one single product: the game figurines of Khamûl the Easterling (as you know, the name Khamûl does not appear in the text of LotR of The Hobbit).

[William Cloud Hicklin]

After all, even though Tolkien Enterprise's licensing rights are granted in perpetuity, they can be revoked by the courts (which I am sure would please Christopher Tolkien, and be the crowning achievement of his curmudgeonly struggle for control of his father's legacy).

Rubbish.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

Rubbish.

Rubbish? In what sense do you mean, WCH?

[Sauron the White]

Yes, I too would like a bit more in the way of detail.
WCH - are you saying that - based on what you know - CT would be unhappy or upset if the film rights reverted to him and/or the Estate?

[Mithalwen]

Surely it is obvious he means rubbish to the "Christopher Tolkien is a miserable old git who only wants to spoil everyone's fun" cliche?

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Precisely, Mith.

Note also that the film rights aren't going to revert to the Estate: even if the court grants the plaintiffs' petition, all it means is that the Estate has the option to remove them from New Line/TW: and thus revert them back to Zaentz and MGM/UA.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Yes, I too would like a bit more in the way of detail.
WCH - are you saying that - based on what you know - CT would be unhappy or upset if the film rights reverted to him and/or the Estate?

Where's this idea that the Estate wants, or even expects, to get the film rights back come from? All I've seen is the following statement from the Tolkien Trust:

The complaint seeks, among other things, in excess of $150 million in compensatory damages, as well as punitive damages, and a declaration from the Court that the plaintiffs have a right to terminate any further rights New Line may have to the Tolkien works under the agreements, including The Hobbit, due to the serious and material nature of the breach of the agreements.

which I interpret to mean that if New Line don't hand over what they owe then the Trust don't want New Line to be able to make any more movies based on Tolkien's work - which at worst would mean that Zaentz would be free to sell them to any other studio (who would then be free to hire Jackson & Del Toro, or whoever they wanted, to produce/direct.

If anyone has seen any statement from Christopher or anyone else associated with the Trust/Estate that they have any intention, or even desire, to get back the movie rights I'd be interested to hear it.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Moreover, neither Saul Zaentz nor MGM/UA are named as defendants in the lawsuit, which means that they cannot have rights taken away.