Slashdot Mirror
Tolkien Trust Sues New Line, May Kill "Hobbit"
oboreruhito writes "The AP is reporting that the Tolkien Trust and HarperCollins are suing New Line Cinema for $150 million in compensatory damages, unspecified punitive damages, and a court order revoking New Line's rights to produce any more films on Tolkien properties. The Tolkien Trust says that New Line paid them only $62,500 to make 'The Lord of the Rings' trilogy of films — instead of the agreed-upon 7.5 percent of gross receipts of all film-related revenue. The suit may set back, if not kill, a film adaptation of Lord of the Rings prequel 'The Hobbit,' which Peter Jackson had recently signed up to make after his own legal row with the studio over payment for the sequels."
Studios are scumbags. They do "creative" accounting so that no film ever makes money on paper. If you get suckered into accepting net points you will never EVER see a dime. Gross points are the real money and even then they find ways of hiding that money.
This is why you see lots of big actors and big name directors and talent working on more and more "indie" films. they actually get what they are promised from the indie companies.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
It's part of the MPIAA. They want all the money for themselves.
I don't think the Hobbit is ever going to be made at this rate.
I wouldn't pay anyone much to be able to make "Lord of teh Rings" either, "Lord of the Rings" however I may pay a fair bit more for :p
I'm shocked! Shocked!
We all know that Hollywood Accounting is a complete scam.
My subject is a quote from TFA.
Let's break this down.
"The Lord of teh Ring's trilogy"
You know what, I'm not even going to bother. What kind of retard submitted this?
We are one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. Back to you with the weather, Bob!
who cares ?
This is typical of the MPAA companies. They use creative bookkeeping to make profitable films look as though they produce no money so they can screw people out of their share of the revenue.
Maybe Digg should catch up as well. Heard this 2 days ago on google news.
...Major entertainment companies have long been of the opinion that the artists who create the products they sell are expendable and interchangable... THis is how a studio executive could sleep at night after giving the Tolkien estate less than $63,000 compensation for a property that has made New Line north of $1 billion in revenue...
Glad to hear it--they're getting what they deserver.
Who did what now?
the site's doing everything in its power to -be- Digg down to the very look and feel, and failing miserably.
Surely failing to imitate Digg is a good thing...
Blank until
when they saw the headline,
"Stand back, New Line, or the Hobbit gets it!" ?
Hope they are right and supposed to get a cut of the gross. Otherwise it sounds like another case of Hollywood Accounting.
Provided you happen to be an accountant who works in a movie studio.
Has anyone ever figured out the arithmetic to find out how much profit a given studio is making on the assumption that the takings they quote to people who should be getting X% of the total are accurate? I am pretty sure it would demonstrate a massive loss year-on-year.
What kind of retard reads the summary, clicks the read more link, then posts about a typo?
BTW the C in Christ is captialized.
Everybody loves bashing RIAA, MPAA and the big bad studios, but come on: The Lord of the Rings was originally published in *1955* (more than 50 years ago). Tolkien died in 1973 (more than 35 years ago). The publishers really had enough time to make money; it should be public domain by now. Yes, I know copyright usually expires 50/70 years after the author's death, but these laws really need updating.
Either someone is screwing up paying the fees due for the LOTR-movies, or some asshat studio director thinks he can make the company some money by not paying up and waiting if he is found out. Of course, no one is going to complain if you screw them out of a couple of million dollars... Sheesh, do they want this movie to be made, or not? Chances are, it'll make them another zillion dollars, seeing how popular the LOTR-trilogy was. But first they screwed over Peter Jackson, making him reconsider making the film, now it turns out they haven't paid the copyright fees.
Btw, isn't it ironic that a movie studio, seemingly very fond of copyrights and keen on apprehending copyrights violations would not pay their fees?
My sources tell me that the submitter typed it correctly but that the Slashdot 'editors' were required to add the typo in order to 'keep it real'.
because I never read digg.
If you see all not-news here, why are you still coming?
Considering New Line Cinemas string of dodgy accounting practices and refusal to pay artists/directors their cut of the profits, it make me think they have some dodgy underworld connections.
You mean it's a quote from TFS.
1- Sign a contract promising a percentage of the gross 2- Pay a small advance to get the job done 3- Once the job is done, don't pay one more cent, and laugh all the way to the bank. 4- Most contractants don't know a decent lawyer or can't afford them, or won't bother to sue -- too much worry. 5- Profit.
In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
The MPAA and their lovers in bed the RIAA have been gong after people for downloading movies and music and everything in between in hopes that people will buy more CDs or specifically more songs (Wired says record companies make more money off songs than CDs>) even to the extent of saying it is illegal to rip CD you bought and put it on your computer and than again to place those same purchased songs on your iPod or MP3 player.
This is pathetic. Those hippocrits are still making tons of money due to the Lord of the Rings trilogy and the millions they have made so far, they should at least be respectful. Without LoTR I bet New Line wouldn't have enough money to spend bribing congressman so they should be happy with the few they can buy off and wait for another movie after paying their debts to penetrate deeper and deeper in our government.
Slowly and slowly we are electing the MPAA and RIAA into office and sooner or later the world will be come a dictatorship, not by a single person or politician, but by the entertainment industry telling us we can't even laugh without paying a tax for something funny.
But what do I know?
One day the world of robotics will have the answer.
Maybe we can prove they come straight from Digg; did they have the same typo - 'The Lord of teh Rings'?
simon
My precioussss
It looks like most of those around adaptations of Tolkien's works are one by one falling prey to the same
sad curse that overtook Gollum...
"My Precious, My Precious!... Must have the Precious!"
If I may say so, I truly wonder what Tolkien himself would think of all this pathetic bickering and bitter lawsuits.
Z.
When I lived in Wales I shared a student house with a girl called Freya who is a close descendant of Tolkien. I have to say the family is a very nice family and they certainly should get alot more than they are currently getting for the rights. Then again, why should they make money for someone elses work that they didn't make themselves? It's a tough call, but I'm biased so I think they should get the money (and give some to me lol) :-)
It's for reasons just like this that when you want to get actually paid what you're owed you make certain that the contract stipulates you get a percentage of "all gross revenues, without regard to source." The accountants can't fudge those numbers, and you get paid what you are rightfully owed. With crap like this going on -- where no movie ever makes a profit -- is it any waonder that the companies are seen as such scum?
quite an aspiration.
Mever nind the typos.
Monkey points:
In the motion picture industry, the term monkey points refers to the practice of many low budget production companies offering talent, such as actor or writer, a percentage of a film's profits, as opposed to a percentage of the film's gross, or a fixed salary. (The 'monkey' is intended to be derogatory.)
This term was coined by Eddie Murphy, who also stated that only a fool would accept net points in their contracts; always insist on gross points. Since such projects usually never make any money--at least on paper--the talent who accepts a percentage of the project's profits usually never makes any money.
Because they don't WANT 50-year copyrights.
If New Line put their stuff down for a 50-year copyright and release stuff they own older than that, then maybe I'd go along with them.
You would think the Tolkien estate would be able to afford laywers up-front to advise them on the stupidity of that contract.
LotR childish? You obviously haven't tried reading the original (or its companion novels like the Silmarillion) recently. The majority of children in the majority of schools wouldn't get past the first page without getting confused by half a dozen words and deciding it was "wordy and boring".
Anyone else remember Dragon magazine and the spoof on getting sued by the Tolkien estate - they weren't allowed to say "ring".
"Someone get the phone, its circular metal banding off the hook!"
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
Last I checked, most genre fiction (including most of sci fi) is crap. I wouldn't normally include LotR in that category, but I see what you're saying. LotR, Narnia, Pan's Labrynth, Spiderwick, etc... it does seem to be a bit much! Of course, one could say the same thing about comic book movies.
Throughout 3 hefty volumes, Sauron's forces had chance after chance to kill any of the four hobbits. And yet, they failed utterly. What makes these lawyers think they can do better?
Why did you insert the apostrophe in "ring's"? The summary correctly had it as "rings". The only problems I see are the misspelled "teh" and perhaps the initial "the" should have been outside the quotes. (I'd rather see italics than quotes, but who cares?)
You misspelled "loser", and I can't even guess what you were aiming for with @#$%.
Blank until
I dunno, it reminds me of this -
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-319611-l33t-of-teh-rings.html
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Nasty Tolkienses! TRICKSY!!!!!!
The reason for IP is to give the creators an incentive to create, not for the folks who buy the rights to profit off of them for all eternity.
I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
I agree that 50 years is too long (or about right).
But what do you think the same studios would say if you took a film made in 1954 and just started distributing it? They'd sue you into oblivion. Further, it was the film studios themselves who pushed for such long copyright terms.
So I don't see they have either the legal or moral standing to complain about this. They should pay their damned bills, frankly.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Scifi is fantasy, arseknuckles.
Battlefield Earth 2, NOW!
Digg can be a neat site for the sheer volume of articles, but it has some serious and aggravating problems. To give one example: it was refreshing to come here this morning and find only one story about the Anonymous protests of Scientology instead of, oh, say, ten.
The Anonymous group seems to have taken a page from Ron Paul supporters: they've positively Digg-bombed the place, putting multiple (and entirely redundant) stories onto the front page, as if this will somehow raise awareness about the CoS amongst a demographic that is vulnerable to the Church's tactics. But they can't do that on Slashdot because of the editorial control here. Add to this the fact that Digg is no longer news for nerds in the way Slashdot is (sports articles now show up with alarming frequency on Digg), and that the comments on Digg absolutely stink compared with those here (yes, they're even worse than ours).
I enjoy Digg for its constant volume of new articles, but Slashdot's articles are much better presented (yes, even with the "teh" in TFA). If this site posted more frequent stories to compete with Digg's volume I'd have little reason to go to Digg. Volume is about the only advantage they have.
Teh kind taht type faster tahn tehy tihnk, I'd say.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
I believe the question you meant to ask was, "what kind of retard let this story go live with such an obvious (though innocuous) spelling error?"
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
shouldn't the MPAA be thanking filesharers, since they're diluting their losses? (just using Hollywood accounting logic here)
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Without the royalty money, how is author J. R. R. Tolkien going to afford to put food on his table? Why, without the royalty money, he may not even be able to afford to write a new book!
(I'm not sure who to cheer for here)
If it really was 7.5% off the gross and not the net, Newline could be in for a world of hurt.
First, as everyone should know: you never, ever sign a contract for royalties on net profit. There will never be ANY net. Period. It is far too easy to make that happen, especially if you are not on equal footing. It doesn't metter what the relationship is, if you are signing a contract where you get royalties for anything, it is always on the gross revenue, never anything else. End of story.
Second. Studios lie about their revenue. The WGA strikes have shown this, and everyone knows it. Everyone knows that they lie about revenue. Essentially what you shuold be doing when you saying when you sign a contract with the studio is this: I get to choose the highest available estimate of revenue as my basis for what you owe me on royalties. If you put out figures claiming the film has grossed $1.2b at the box, then we go by that figure, unless you have other figures that are higher. You can't claim one figure publicly and then sell me on another, lower, figure in private. On the other hand, those in estate situations like this should be able to to demand open accounting on projects. I know I would. If you sell the movie rights to a book, then you should probably say something like: I need to have access to the accounting procedures for complete independent review.
Third, I am also ambiguous about copyright length. I strongly maintain that authors, even those doing work for hire, should retain private copyright. Corporations should not own copyrights in the same way that private authors do. Who then would own the story for Pixar's movie 'Toy Story'? I don't know. I think that when a team of individuals are doing a collaborative work, then the corporation can own the copyright for a period of time not greater than 25 years (or some other period of time). This gives the studio sufficient time to reap profit from works, but then allows them to become public domain in an appropriate fashion. Individuals or private teams (say co-authored works) become copyrighted for the life of the author or primary author. After this time, the estate may continue to produce related material and any new material is under copyright of the new author using their life as the benchmark. I think provisions for the immediate descendents garnering automatic royalties for major deritive works would be appropriate, which would be mean that Tolkien's children would get money for the production of anything made related to Middle Earth, but they would have no control over what actually got made. It would then be up to consumers to decide what was worthy of purchase and what was crap. A rare and shocking concept, true, but I think an important one.
"We don't know what we are doing, but we are doing it very carefully,..." Wherry, R.J. Personnel Psychology (1995)
No that's the actual title of teh movie. They modernized it to get teh kids interested.
Can I bum a sig?
Oh yeah, all the money we scammed from the family of Tolkien.
God spoke to me.
Golly, sorry to hear that you're forced against your will to read these books and see these movies!
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Screw Battlefield Earth 2, I'm still waiting for History of the World, Part 2 and Spaceballs II: The Search for More Money. "See Hitler on ice! See a Viking funeral! See Jews in SPAAAAAAAACE!!"
I write sci-fi for metalheads
7.5% is actually a hair over $65 million
Need I say more?
(I mean "Need eye sae moore?")
I'm starting to think I took a joke seriously. Doh!
Mever nind the typos.
I read the LotR trilogy. The English original text.
The best description I have for it is: vast as the ocean, deep as a plate.
(Perhaps if I had read it when I was 9 or 10... but I read it when I was 18, and that was way too late....)
They fixed it after the OP posted, that's why, assclown.
Meh, it was a poor attempt. Call me when Teh Lol of teh Ringz0rz comes out.
which is totally what she said
On my last attempt to reread LotR, I had to quit at the first Tom Bombadil dance and song scene.
'nuff said.
Take life easy: one bit at a time.
As far as I know, there is the Tolkien Enterprises, based in US and controlling the film, stage and merchandise rights to Lord of the Rings and Hobbit, which Tolkien sold in 1969 (for a flat fee, AFAIK, so no royalties are involved); and there is the Tolkien Estate, based in UK and owning the rights to everything else Tolkien ever wrote, including the Silmarillion and what was published as "The History of Middle-earth". The Estate is ran by JRR's son Christopher, and he is strongly against any derivative work (films etc) based on anything the Estate controls. However, as far as I know again, the Estate cannot claim any damages by any work based on LotR and Hobbit, as those rights were sold by Tolkien himself. IANAL, so it's possible that there is some legal clause which might revert the sale after the author's death, but if it was so I'd guess that the Estate could have enforced that a long ago since the author's death in 1973.
Here's basically how it works..
New Line makes movie, movie costs $100MM to make.
Movie is a moderate hit, Movie makes $150 MM in theaters and tie-ins in the first year.
The $150 MM Profit number gets reported by New Line to your little website.
But, there's more...
The actual studio and sound stages aren't owned by New Line, they're owned by New Line Studios and Sound Stages, Inc.
And they must be compensated. $5 MM.
And, of course, the post-production is done by New Line Post Production, Inc.
Andd they must be compensated. $10 MM.
And then there's the TV advertising. This is done by New Line Trailer Production, Inc.
And they must be compensated. $30 MM.
And we can't forget the costs of booking travel and making the logistical operations. This is done by New Line Logistics
And they must be compensated. $5 MM.
And when it's all said and done...
Damn...
The movie JUST broke even.
Sorry little fella, but New Line made a big investment here, and we just don't have the ability to pay you out of our pockets: As it is we just broke even!
Of course, all those Subsidiaries will be kicking most of that back upstairs, but hey, that's THE BIZ!!!!
Just because new line does not do the film doesn't kill it. They can either independently produce it or find another studio.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
I'm surprised that the IRS hasn't appeared on the scene at some of these movie studios - don't these accounting practices also involve tax evasion? If there are films making billions, the IRS should be in for a tidy amount.
I kinda liked it.
maybe I'll go pro some day.
Mever nind the typos.
I had always been told that Tolkien sold of the movie rights to the books long ago cause he didn't think it would ever be possible to produce a movie. Is this true or urban legend?
Why oh why does Hollywood have such a hard time with living up to contract obligations. Just goes to show you that to them, signing a piece of paper means nothing to them.
Box office receipts = $6 billion
Loss to piracy = -$10 billion
Total gross income = -$3 billion
Sorry, there's no money left.
I've always thought that Tolkien sold the film and stage rights to LoTR and The Hobbit in 1969 for a fixed amount. The issue is not whether the LoTR movies made a lot of money or had a high gross but whether there is some contract between the studio and the Tolkien Trust stating that the Tolkien Trust is owed part of the movie's receipts. If there is some a contract the Trust should make it publicly available.
You have to admit, the Silmarillion was pretty boring - it was written like a history book. I loved the trilogy.. but just could never make it through the Silmarillion.
It's hard to know who to root for here; the greedy family who want to profit off work they did not create, or the greedier studio who wants to profit off work they did create (but didn't originate). At least the studio will use the money to create more movies, the Tolkien's will probably use the money to hire better lawyers for their next licensing negotiation.
Hello MR CHRISTOPHER REUEL TOLKIEN, MS JOAN ANNE REUEL TOLKIEN, MISS PRISCILLA MARY ANNE REUEL TOLKIEN, and MRS BAILLIE TOLKIEN. It's 2008. The first LotR film came out in 2001. What's have you been doing for the last seven (7) years?
www.itjerk.com
Most genre fiction is crap (Sturgeon's law), and pretty much all literary fiction written since there was a distinction is crap.
A couple breaking the promise of marriage, or a parent breaking a promise to their son or daughter is really no different...
Marriage is a tad different, in that the things that are promised ("vowed," which is a word we don't hear often enough without irony) are impossible to promise. You may say you will love, cherish, and respect another until the day you die, but you are not promising something you can, in good faith, honestly *know* you can deliver.
People change. Feelings change. Circumstances change. To promise to love someone forever is not a realistic promise. You can promise to *try*. But you can't promise you *will.* At least, not with any real certainty.
In business (and in promises to kids or spouses about realistic promises), you are promising to deliver something that is within your ability. If you promised something you *can't* deliver, you are a liar. If you renege, you are a cheat (in the case of business).
I do wish there were a code of honor these days, but there isn't. Instead, misinformation, lies, and manipulation are the norm in politics and business. So, why shouldn't it be the norm in our day-to-day lives, as well?
Oh, well. If you do your best to be honorable, I will also do my best to be honorable. If we can get a few hundred thousand to also be honorable, we might be able to change things for the better.
I wouldn't count on it, though.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
If an inventor wants to monetize his invention, he should either develop it himself or license it to a company to develop.
I think that's the *best* way to revamp our "intellectual property" laws. Change it so that patents and copyrights may only be held by the individuals who created the work or invented the patentable idea. Corporations should be barred from owning the copyrights or patents. The only IP a corporation may own is its trademarks.
Patents would be good for the standard 20 years, or to the death of the patent holders, whichever comes first. Copyrights would be good for the life of the authors. I mean, why the hell not? Sure, that might be 80 years, but what the hell. It's not like we *need* it.
Non-transferable, individually-granted patents and copyrights are really the only way to move back to a fair IP structure. Granted, it makes the assumption that copyrights and patents actually encourage progress rather than hinder it (which is an article of faith-- they has not been shown to help at all).
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
You have to remember that Tolkien was a philologist, first and foremost. The Lord of the Rings is a history of a war that happened in a world that never existed. The Silmarillion is another history, mixed with an origin myth that resembles the Judeo-Christian creation myth (check out the parallels between Melkor/Morgoth and Lucifer/Satan). All of those books that Christopher Tolkien compiled from Tolkien's notes and unfinished material are also works of history.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
How can lawyers be easier to kill when they're just flesh and bone, like normal people? It's not like the head of New Line's legal department can only be killed by a woman after being hamstrung by a hobbit.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
but what incentive is there for killing someone to remove the copyright? Because all of YOUR competitors will now get access to the previously copyrighted work and you will not be able to get monopoly rent from it.
And when you're caught out in flat-out murder, do you think the corporation is going to be able to pay a fine???
I had meant to say, "How can lawyers be more evil". Sorry 'bout that.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
Now there is a great idea - have Terry Gilliam do the Hobbit. Only the plot would need some twisting to make it into Gilliam territory.
When the dwarves are captured by the elves, at least one needs to die during interrogation while believing that they are escaping. Sting would need to be a vorpal blade. Smaug would swallow its victims and then spit out the bones. Some time travel would be inevitable while leaving Dale. Shelley Duval would make a cameo appearance asking Thorin to return the map. Thorin would become delusional and would try to reach the Mountain in a balloon. It would all end with Bard declaring that he was not the Messiah.
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
All of the major studios are publicly traded companies. You would think that the SEC would see to it that the shareholders aren't cheated by enforcing reasonable accounting practices. Especially so in the wake of Sarbanes-Oxley.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
They are talking about GROSS receipts, not net income - assuming that the contract calls for a percent of gross receipts, then this has nothing to do with so-called "hollywood accounting", as they would be collecting money from the sales, i.e. the top line.
Can slashdot admins publish the parent's poster email address on the front page, please!!!
Both parent and grandparent need to be modded +1 funny, please.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
'Peter Jackson had recently signed up to make after his own legal row with the studio over payment for the sequels'
Recent? This article is from June of 2005, a little shy of three years ago. Hell, I think the lawsuit was covered on slashdot as well.
You's kids get off my lawn!
This is OT and all that, but I heartily agree. Slashdot is a news aggregator too, of course, but it's the reader comments I come back for. No one can be an expert on everything, but on Slashdot there are experts for everything.
If there's another article on the RIAA, for example, there will be at least one insightful post from NewYorkCountryLawyer, who is an actual lawyer fighting the RIAA's lawsuits. You don't get that kind of quality, inside perspective from Digg.
Digg's posters remind one rather strongly of the early days of BBS'es, when childish comments and flame wars that lasted a generation swept from one side to the other.
Let Slashdot remain Slashdot, and let the kiddies and trolls stay on Digg.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
big monies
It occurs to me that you might just be able to make the Sarbanes-Oxley law apply here.
Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
This is the same story for every movie, they just change the titles and main characters a little.
Alot like hollywood these days.
There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
is producing films with budgets beyond OUR means
What word is "capitialized"?
Very well put. One thing that struck me after studying German for a while is that, much like "sit" and "set" or "lie" and "lay" are intransitive/transitive verb pairs differentiated by the central vowel ("sitzen" and "setzen" / "liegen" and "legen" in the German), so too are "live" and "love" ("leben" and "lieben") -- "love" is the transitive form of "live". So in that sense, loving someone is helping them live well, helping them grow and be healthy. Romance doesn't *have* to enter into this picture, which is why you can just as well love your siblings even despite a very rocky growing up. Which is also why I know that I'm loving my wife the most not when I'm feeling all lovey-dovey, but when she's annoying the crap out of me or I'm pissed as hell at her, but *still* try my damnedest to make things work.
Love is work. Marriage is work. And the truer measure of how much you love your partner/spouse doesn't happen during the easy times -- it's how you behave and how you work at it during the rough times, even if you happen to hate each other's guts right at that moment. *That's* when you fulfill whatever promises or vows you've made.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
Sounds like they have a bad hobbit of not paying their bills.
In business, never leave your partners with the short end of the stick.
"Teach a man to build a fire, and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life."
10 years of his life justifies a lot of money. Co-writing that screenplay does not. The screenplay was so bloody terrible compared to the original, it was like watching a two-year-old paint over the Mona Lisa. With a crayon.
/silly
So, I have this idea for a great movie. It's about two gnomes who find a bracelet of power, and they have to take it to the Burning Steppes and cast it into the Cauldron. They form the Brotherhood of the Bracelet. Along the way they're trailed by a murloc named Gottom, who's obsessed with the bracelet, and nine bracelet bogeymen. It could be a three-parter, called 'Ruler of the Bracelet'. The first part would be called 'The Brotherhood of the Bracelet', followed by 'A Couple of Towers', with the climactic ending called 'Hey, the King's Back!'
Your post is a perfect example of what I detest about Digg: the users, who appear to be a bunch of petty, spiteful little shits who can't accept a difference in opinion.
If Slashdot is so horrible, why waste your time here? Is the biggest thrill of your day, your wittiest retort to copy/paste an email address that's obviously a spam-trap anyway? Is your life so devoid of emotional security, meaning and purpose that defending a site that you don't own or operate while attempting to screw over someone on a site they don't own or operate makes you feel like you've achieved something?
What a sad, pathetic excuse for a human being you must be.
Blank until
Keep in mind many of these so-called indie film companies are wholly or significantly owned by the giant Hollywood studios. They are "independent" or indie in artificially generated image only.
The Hibbot: sounds like an excellent idea for a Simpsons Treehouse of Horror episode.
Damn QUOTE A DAY calendar!!!
2.9 Billions dollars worldwide gross.
The studio owes the Tolkien Trust 218 Million dollars per the contract.
Lawyers should be signing on EN MASSE to get some of that shit, and I hope they win. New Line is a bunch of fucking thieves from what I'm seeing.
Mr. Baggins was unreachable for comment.
Yes, I know copyright usually expires 50/70 years after the author's death, but these laws really need updating
Umm, those *are* the updates. We (in the US) used to have 14 year terms for Copyright.
They don't fix these things in the right direction. Maybe when some Restorationists get elected....
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Well, when you put your case in such a clear and detailed way, how could anyone disagree?
Or does any thing go in the Banana republic of America?
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
I mean if I buy the DVDs I'll give money to THEM!
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Yeah, I can think of a way to improve Digg about 200 percent that would probably take about 2 hours of programming time. I want to be able to simply tell Digg that I want it to filter from my front page any stories from rawstory, thinkprogress, alternet, truthout, etc.
I just don't get it. It's a simple change. Why can't I tell Digg what kinds of stories I'm not interested in?
- Alaska Jack
Golollum: I Haz Teh Precious
Bilolbo: Lost Hobbit is Lost.
Gollum: I Can Has Bilburger?
Bilolbo: I'm In Ur Caves, Tellin' Ur Riddels
Golollum: WANT!
Bilolbo: A Ringz, I Findz It.
Golollum: Nooooes! They Be Stealing Mah Precious!!!
Bilolbo: Invisible Me.
Golollum: Mah Precious, I Mourns It.
Tagged: lolkien, lolbbit, golollum
Of course, the other problem with Digg is the opposite - anyone who can muster a sufficient number of users can make a story disappear, even if it's newsworthy and far more users think it should be posted. (This has, apparently, happened with more or less all of the Scientology-related articles).
I mean The Hobbit was originally published in 1937, why is there even any question about royalties? The book is over 70 years old, it should be public domain already!
If I remember correctly, the gross revenue worldwide exceeds $6 billion U.S. Dollars, not Yens or Pesos. 7.5% of that is $450 million. They are paying approximately 0.01% of the correct amount. Something needs to be audited.
A movie studio not respecting the owners of Intellectual Property it licensed? How outrageous! Well that's hypocrasy for you.... Now back to my torrents...
"I dunno - how many kinds of idiots are there"
- (Ogre from an episode of Gummi Bears)
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
I'm in ur visible, stealin your sight
which is totally what she said
IANAL, but "agreed-upon" just doesn't cut the mustard when it comes to legal obligation. If there's a contract, fine; New Line et al would be in breach and the case would be simple. If there is no contract, Tolkien Trust and friends should realize it's over, they fucked it up, go home.
The Tolkien estate milking a cash cow that should have gone into public domain years ago. In fact it WAS out of copyright for a while, but that didn't stop the estate from lying, belittling, and threatening to sue people.
So screw em and their un-creative asses.
Bunch of whiners.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Because the millions are either available because of copyrights giving monopoly control or the millions are now available for ALL possible entrants. And so they will ALL be sharing the millions.
Meaning no millions.
And if there are no competitors, how about NOT killing the author, giving them a cut of 10% of those millions and STAYING OUT OF JAIL?
They held to their end of the contract.
PJ didn't like what they did so he sued, and frankly shouldn't have won.
Here is a clue: when you dign a movie contract be sure to get a gross from the movie, it's tie ins, and its SUBSIDIARY tie ins.
Sure, they were scummy, but the did meet their end of the signed contract.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on