Swindler's List

trysail

Catch Me Who Can
Joined
Nov 8, 2005
Posts
25,593
Only Hollywood!

Sheesh! What a bunch of slimeballs!

Why anybody believes anything that emanates from Hollywood is beyond comprehension. "Hollywood ethics" are identical to those practiced by politicians and Wall Street.


"If you can trust a man, a written contract is a waste of paper. If you can't trust a man, a written contract is still a waste of paper."
-George F. Getty
( an attorney and father of J. Paul Getty )


____________________


( Fair Use Excerpts )
‘Hobbit’ Heirs Seek $220 Million From Time Warner Over ‘Rings’
By Brett Pulley

July 15 (Bloomberg) -- J.R.R. Tolkien sold movie rights to his “Lord of the Rings” novels 40 years ago for 7.5 percent of future receipts. Three films and $6 billion later, his heirs say they haven’t seen a dime from Time Warner Inc.

The accounting methods used by New Line Cinema, the Time Warner unit that made the movies, will face a jury’s scrutiny in October, when the heirs’ lawsuit against the New York-based media company is set for trial in Los Angeles Superior Court.

*****​

“Usually it’s not outright thievery by the studios, but death by contract,” said Pierce O’Donnell, a Los Angeles- based lawyer...

*****​

The three films based on Tolkien’s fantasy epic -- 2001’s “The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring”; “The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers” in 2002; and “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King,” released in 2003 -- have generated almost $3 billion in worldwide box-office receipts, and another $3 billion from DVDs, merchandise and other sources, according to Rowe.

*****​

Tolkien, a writer and professor at Oxford University who died in 1973, received $250,000 from United Artists when he signed over the film rights in 1969, according to a copy of the original contract, which was filed as evidence in the case.

Under the contract, New Line was to pay a percentage of all gross receipts, after deducting 2.6 times the production costs, plus advertising expenses in excess of a certain amount

*****​

Gross receipts typically consist of the studio’s share of box-office sales and revenue from sources such as home video, TV, merchandise and music royalties, O’Donnell said.

New Line’s accounting included 20 percent of home- entertainment revenue, instead of the 100 percent called for in the contract, the heirs say. The studio excluded foreign revenue, saying Warner Bros., not New Line, received those sales for distributing the films abroad, according to the complaint.

“The agreement says ‘all,’” Eskenazi said. “All does not mean 20 percent. All means all.”

*****​

“My instinct tells me this is Hollywood accounting in the extreme,” said O’Donnell, who wrote a book, “Fatal Subtraction: How Hollywood Really Does Business.” “If I was a betting man I’d say there’s money owed.”

____________
Full story:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&sid=aiAEIATGLREU
 
Last edited:
This is pretty typical for Hollywood. I'm surprised the heirs didnt end owing the studio anything.
 
Oh, that! Yes. Pretty much the usual and par for the course.

I'm wondering though...why are you so outraged about Hollywood ethics? You make it sound like they used to have some, or have ever had any, or even pretend that they're ethical. Anyone who knows Hollywood history would never presume that.

That's entertainment. Always has been, and likely always will be.
 
...That's entertainment. Always has been, and likely always will be.

Or, one could say "that's capitalism. Always has been, and likely always will be." That's why we have government regulations - because capitalists are incapable of regulating themselves. I'm glad to see Trysail is finally posting in support of more government regulations.
 
Oh, that! Yes. Pretty much the usual and par for the course.

I'm wondering though...why are you so outraged about Hollywood ethics? You make it sound like they used to have some, or have ever had any, or even pretend that they're ethical. Anyone who knows Hollywood history would never presume that.

That's entertainment. Always has been, and likely always will be.

It's worth pointing out that John Ronald Reuel is many years dead. It's arguable that son Chris had some creative input into Silmarillion, but it was not Silmarillion that was filmed.

I mean, yes, Hollywood are sharks, and it seems from Peter Jackson's remarkably similar complaint over the same project that New Line are worse sharks than most. But - are we really going to argue that, long after the artist is dead, people who had no creative input into the work are entitled to 7% of three billion dollars?

Narrative is organic. Tolkien used and recycled story elements out of folk myth. Where would Tolkien have been if Snorre Sturlasson had copyrighted elves back in the twelth century? We cannot have a culture in which narratives evolve to meet the needs of succeeding generations, if every element of narrative is tied down in perpetuity by copyrights and contracts. We will become voiceless, unable to tell any stories at all

It seems to me wholly wrong that copyright in a work should outlive the creator of the work: wrong and inequitable. I really don't see why copyrights should last more than ten or fifteen years. We need narratives to return to the commons, so that future generations of narrators can remake them anew.
 
It seems to me wholly wrong that copyright in a work should outlive the creator of the work: wrong and inequitable. I really don't see why copyrights should last more than ten or fifteen years. We need narratives to return to the commons, so that future generations of narrators can remake them anew.
To some extent I agree with your argument, though I wouldn't want some poor widow to lose out on her only income because her husband had passed and his work was now common domain, with everyone but her profiting from it. Surely, said husband would want her taken care of. Whether his great-grandkids make out like bandits is another story.

And we'll grant that Tolkien's heirs have certainly benefited from this golden goose for a long time and in several incarnations--every time someone has wanted to make it into film, include The Hobbit cartoon, or calendars, or things like Silmarilion and Middle Earth encyclopedias and such.

That said, an agreement is an agreement and if New Line had an agreement with Tolkien's heirs, they should pay up.
 
Ethics and morals in Hollywood?
Might be as big an oxymoron as having them in Washington :eek:
 
Back
Top