Slashdot Mirror
Watchmen Delayed, Or Worse
whisper_jeff writes "Due to some potential copyright issues, The Watchmen might be delayed, or worse. It seems that Fox claims it still owns copyrights which would prevent Warner Bros from releasing the movie. US District Court Judge Gary Feess decided that Fox had enough of a case that he's willing to hear things out. The geek in me hopes that it will be resolved quickly and the movie will hit theaters on time."
There is a more detailed account - including a useful chronology - over at Deadline Hollywood Daily if you are so inclined.
Assuming that version of events is correct, then it looks like Fox may still have a legitimate claim on distribution rights for Watchmen. If so, then this lawsuit is probably more likely a way for them to get a cut of the action rather than to stop the whole thing outright.
"Warner Bros.' production and anticipated release of 'The Watchmen' motion picture violates 20th Century Fox's long-standing motion picture rights in 'The Watchmen' property," Fox said in a statement, though the graphic novel's title is simply "Watchmen."
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117990722.html?categoryid=13&cs=1&nid=2563
Nice goin', Fox. You don't even know you're talking about.
Its true. WB had the same problem with the Dukes of Hazzard movie, and simply had to pay a bunch of money to make the problem go away. I doubt Fox actually wants to stop the movie, nobody makes any money then. They'll just be bought off if they win.
Here's a good writeup on the issue: http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/urgent-warners-watchmen-in-legal-peril/
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
The damn thing is going to be heart-breakingly bad anyhow from what I've seen & read about it.
That is what I had assumed. I didn't figure there was any way Hollywood could possibly turn out a decent version of Watchmen.
But then I read this, and now I'm vaguely hopeful.
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
From comment on Deadline Hollywood Daily above:
4) Waiting - Waiting is a common game in Hollywood. When you see someone doing something you don't like, you usually wait until they are fairly pregnant, because that's where the money is. Had Fox stepped in the second they saw this occur, the movie probably just wouldn't have gotten made by WB, and Fox would be sitting on a property they hadn't developed in decades. BUT... by waiting until WB finished production, now there's money! Now Fox can see some cash because WB is so pregnant that they have to do something to release the movie. It is possible that WB can make an equitable claim of laches (sitting around trying to maximize the damages), but that's in equity, not in law; and that's strictly up to the court.
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
if they screw up the release schedule, fox reaps massive ill will from the distributors
if they cancel, fox won't make any money on their claim
what will happen is the lawyers will argue about numbers, fox will get $25 million, and fox will walk away
this happened on the johnny knoxville/ jessica simpson dukes of hazzard movie. the legal wrangling left some producers with a claim on the property with $17 million
someone looks red faced in wb legal, they screwed up
better analysis at aintitcool.com
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The pirate story wil be released separately, then combined with the movie on DVD. That's where a lot of the *really* dark stuff comes from. So in that sense, it will be toned down. From what I've read, the climax of the story will be changed but still faithful.
I used to be a nysayer, but the stuff I've seen and read thrills me. I think they're going to nail it, and I'll boycott Fox forever if they manage to kill it.
Some real bullshit in your post here we need corrected.
1) Alan Moore DOESNT DO MOVIES... PERIOD. It would have been 100% impossible for the author to be involved when the author ABSOLUTELY FUCKING REFUSES TO BE REGARDLESS OF QUALITY.
2) From everything seen and printed they are being as faithful as possible to the book down to the color scheme of key scenes which are staying on the pastel range like the comic. They are going so faithful as to keep everything minus black freighter, which WILL BE IN THE DVD which will be clocking in at over 5 hours. The movie cut it to keep from going over 3 hours. The movie is planned to be just shy of 3 hours. Everyone who was involved in the comic minue Moore has been involved in the movie from the start. Its just Moore who has become somewhat a recluse. Dave Gibbons even begged him to reconsidered, telling him he would like what they where doing and Moore would have none of it.
Get your facts straight bub before you start spouting off rumor. They are positively being faithful to the book, and Moore chose not to be involved so that he could "bash it with a clear conscious" his quote, they didnt keep him out. Moore got burned and now takes it out on EVERYTHING regardless of quality.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
But in this case, the authors will get paid anyway from company B. Its just an infight between company A and B with company A trying to get a piece of the lucrative cake, even if it's B who put the biggest part of the effort into producing the movie.
For company A to have a case, they must have already paid the authors some agreed sum of money in return to some right to the work. I very much doubt that it's quite as cut and dried as you seem to be trying to make it out to be.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Nice goin', Fox. You don't even know you're talking about.
Actually Fox does know what it's talking about. This isn't a trademark dispute (although "Watchmen" and "The Watchmen" are confusingly similar), it's a copyright dispute. Copyright covers expressions, and to the extend that the plot and characters of the movie are similar to the ones in the graphic novel, if Fox owns the rights to make movies of the novel, then WB is SOL.
I'm curious as to why WB's attorneys let this one get by them...
You realize Alan Moore wrote the Watchmen right?
You can never know for sure who the copyright holder of a work is. Even if you know who created it you can't be sure that they didn't already sell the copyright to someone else.
What if an author was tricked into signing away the copyright (or at least exclusive movie rights) but didn't realise they had done so then later signed another movie deal with a different studio. What if the contract with the first movie studio was somewhat ambiguous as to whether it was exclusive or not?
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Eh, you clearly don't know Alan Moore's opinions of comic book movies, especially his own. He's already (as always) disowned the movie, and says he does not plan on ever seeing it.
He did say however that David Hayter as the screenwriter is the only chance this movie has, but Moore HATES media crossovers.
Do the Authors want the movie made - Yes
Do the Authors want the movie released - Yes
Alan Moore hates the idea of any of his comics being made into a movie. He believes he wrote his work for a particular type of medium in order to show the strengths of that medium and none of his comics will translate well to any other medium.
He has also said that although the Watchmen script is "as close to the original as it could be," that he still won't see the movie.
Hmm... the Author didn't sell his rights to Fox or Warner, he sold them to DC, under a very specific contract, that he now regrets. DC sold the rights to various film companies. Of course, if the author had his way, there would never be a Watchmen movie, and he is refusing to accept any profits or residuals that are rightfully his because he hates the idea of this movie coming out at all.
"MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
Do you have a legal document with the copyright holder's signature on it saying you are entitled to make a movie based on their character? If you don't, it's probably not a good idea to green-light the project.
DC Comics is owned by Warner Bros and has been since at least the early '70s. Watchmen was published in the mid '80s, before comic creators truly asserted their muscle and won creator rights, so as far as I know, DC holds the copyright to Watchmen. (I can't imagine Alan Moore owning the copyright because he would never have allowed a movie based on his work to made in the first place.)
Now if somehow the rights got away from DC/Warner Bros and they didn't realize it until they had all but finished a movie, then yeah, that's a major legal gaff and someone's head ought to roll.
The original author most certainly was not the beneficiary of that transaction. The way he was screwed over on royalties and merchandising rights for Watchmen is one of the reasons Alan Moore still refuses to have anything to do with DC. See his wikipedia page for more details.
Alan Moore and DC had a contract that was good for the time. As soon as Watchmen goes out of print, all the rights revert to him. However, as long as DC is publishing the comic, the rights belong to DC. Obviously, it hasn't ever gone out of print, and likely won't until it falls into the public domain. I read somewhere that DC has the Devil on retainer to help them with their contract writing.
"MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
the number of directors and studios that this project has passed through since Paul Greengrass then Terry Gilliam tried to helm it, and later Darran Aronofsky (though it might have been Gilliam first I'm not 100%), would make it murky as to who was in there first. One thing is for sure, Fox is just trying it on because they want in on a cash cow like Snyder's film of "300".
FurtherMoore (bad pun, I know) it actually seems like it was the producer that hasn't been paying Fox and not any of the other studios. In which case I imagine it would not so much be the blame lying at the feet of Warner Bros legal Dept but rather with the original producer (Lawrence Gordon is still on imdb.com as the producer and he was the one that originally grabbed Gilliam for the project).
I'm hoping it does get released and comes good with a decent interpretation of the text and it's themes. However I think if it sucks everyone will wish it was left alone. That said Snyder seems to be aiming for something that will please Moore, assuming the studio doesn't cut the shit out of it.
War is the statesman's game, the priest's delight, the lawyer's jest, the hired assassin's trade.- Shelley
Geek Alert: Watchmen Movie in Trouble With Fox Suit
JAGga.me ----> Producing video games addressing emotional health and wellness issues affecting teens.