Matthew Belloni, Hollywood Reporter; EXCLUSIVE: 'Superman' Lawsuit Delay Lifted; Depositions of Siegel and Shuster Families to Begin Immediately:
"The Nov. 16 order is the latest in the cartoonishly nasty battle between Warners and the Superman heirs over rights to the lucrative character. After a judge ruled a few years back that the studio might lose certain copyrights associated with the Man of Steel, Warners sued Marc Toberoff, the attorney for the families, claiming he improperly convinced them to back out of deals and terminate their copyright assignments relating to Superman."
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/blogs/thr-esq/superman-lawsuit-delay-lifted-depositions-46688
Showing posts with label Warner Brothers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Warner Brothers. Show all posts
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Judge Delays Ruling on Blocking Release of ‘Watchmen’ Film, New York Times, 12/30/08
Via New York Times: Judge Delays Ruling on Blocking Release of ‘Watchmen’ Film:
"Hollywood ownership fights are not rare, but a dispute over a film that has already been shot and is on the verge of being released is highly unusual. Warner released a statement saying, “We respectfully but vigorously disagree with the court’s ruling and are exploring all of our appellate options.”
The film has been eagerly awaited since last year, when the director Zack Snyder, best known for “300,” announced that he planned a movie based on the widely known graphic novel “Watchmen.”
But the film became embroiled in an extraordinary dispute between studios last winter, when Fox filed suit, claiming that it owned the property on which the movie was based. As the case progressed, fingers pointed from all sides at Lawrence Gordon, the veteran producer who brought the film to Warner after failed attempts over the years to make it with Fox, Universal Pictures and then Paramount...
Judge Feess then weighed in with an unusual reprimand. In a footnote to his order indicating that he would rule in favor of Fox, the judge said Mr. Gordon’s decision to invoke attorney-client privilege rather than testify about his contractual arrangements had helped Fox.
“The court takes a dim view of this conduct,” Judge Feess wrote. “The court will not, during the remainder of this case, receive any evidence from Gordon that attempts to contradict any aspect of this court’s ruling on the copyright issues under discussion.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/30/business/media/30watchmen.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=watchmen&st=cse
"Hollywood ownership fights are not rare, but a dispute over a film that has already been shot and is on the verge of being released is highly unusual. Warner released a statement saying, “We respectfully but vigorously disagree with the court’s ruling and are exploring all of our appellate options.”
The film has been eagerly awaited since last year, when the director Zack Snyder, best known for “300,” announced that he planned a movie based on the widely known graphic novel “Watchmen.”
But the film became embroiled in an extraordinary dispute between studios last winter, when Fox filed suit, claiming that it owned the property on which the movie was based. As the case progressed, fingers pointed from all sides at Lawrence Gordon, the veteran producer who brought the film to Warner after failed attempts over the years to make it with Fox, Universal Pictures and then Paramount...
Judge Feess then weighed in with an unusual reprimand. In a footnote to his order indicating that he would rule in favor of Fox, the judge said Mr. Gordon’s decision to invoke attorney-client privilege rather than testify about his contractual arrangements had helped Fox.
“The court takes a dim view of this conduct,” Judge Feess wrote. “The court will not, during the remainder of this case, receive any evidence from Gordon that attempts to contradict any aspect of this court’s ruling on the copyright issues under discussion.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/30/business/media/30watchmen.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=watchmen&st=cse
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Why Fox is licking its lips over Watchmen, The Guardian, 12/30/08
Via The Guardian: Why Fox is licking its lips over Watchmen, A Christmas Eve ruling on the disputed rights to Alan Moore's graphic novel has left Warner forlorn and the film's release date up in the air:
"After four months of deliberation, Judge Feess decided that 20th Century Fox "owns a copyright interest consisting of, at the very least, the right to distribute the Watchmen motion picture"...
This is Feess's preliminary judgment, prior to a full trial, and now it's left to the two studios to thrash out an agreement, or take further legal action. If Warner Bros (and Paramount, who will be handling the film outside the US) appeals, the film could conceivably not emerge until 2011...
It seems as though Warner Brothers made an unfortunate hit on the one-tenth part of the old adage about possession and the law, and now it is paying the price for its gamesmanship."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2008/dec/30/watchmen-rights-ruling
"After four months of deliberation, Judge Feess decided that 20th Century Fox "owns a copyright interest consisting of, at the very least, the right to distribute the Watchmen motion picture"...
This is Feess's preliminary judgment, prior to a full trial, and now it's left to the two studios to thrash out an agreement, or take further legal action. If Warner Bros (and Paramount, who will be handling the film outside the US) appeals, the film could conceivably not emerge until 2011...
It seems as though Warner Brothers made an unfortunate hit on the one-tenth part of the old adage about possession and the law, and now it is paying the price for its gamesmanship."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2008/dec/30/watchmen-rights-ruling
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)