64 replies to this topic

[Sakura Blossoms]

More like you fail.

Is it possible for you to start a thread WITHOUT pissing someone off with the way that you phrase things.

ANYMORE arguing and this thread WILL be closed INSTANTLY.

[Vyse]

Calm down Ed, it's not the end of the world. We don't want this to turn ugly, so just try to chill a bit... you seem... stressed out!

Anyway, that article didn't say the movie would be terminated. In fact, most of the point here would be that Fox wants a piece of the moneycaek, not to shut the movie down. Although I can't help but think that it was silly of WB not to get everything clear about copyrights and stuff BEFORE they started filming, and they did hurry up the movie after FOX made their first move instead of halting the project and cut their possible loss.

As for me, I'm a fan of the comic, but I'm still optimistic about getting this movie. I still think we'll get it, and I see no reason to blow a fuse over something that isn't set in stone yet. Just wait and see what happens, and if it is cancelled, it's a shame but no reason to get pissed off.

Peace!

[Nate River]

More like you fail.

Alright then. If that's how you want it...

Illjwahm is correct. Like it our not, he's pretty much correct on the law. You may not like what they are doing, you may think it's stupid and petty of them to sit on their hands and then complain that another movie is made. None of that changes the issue of whether they have rights to the movie, which is what the question is. It's not whether they are nice guys for doing this.

Then tell me how Warner Bros. has a snowballs chance in hell. And btw comparing this to a criminal case is one of the worst comparisons in the history of comparing something.

They bought the property 17 years ago and did nothing with it as far as I'm concerned their statue of limitation has run out.

Tell me how they don't. The difference between what you and I are saying is you are claiming they absolutely don't and that fact is obvious on its face. So obvious in fact, that FOX has no right to proceed with it's lawsuit and no right to be heard on the merits either by a judge or jury. I'm NOT claiming FOX the victor, only that on what I know of the suit, the judge was correct in denying the motion to dismiss. As far as I can tell, you called the judge stupid only because he didn't do what you wanted him to.

So, prove to me that FOX has no rights to the film. That articles said absolutely nothing about the terms of the license. You yourself said they did acquire them, so when and how did they lapse? Were they required to do ANYTHING with them? I can think of no statute that requires anybody to do anything with a copyright that they have acquired from someone else. What is generally going to matter is the TERMS of that license. As I explained already, FOX may not ultimately win, and that the motion to dismiss does not mean FOX will win ONLY that it can proceed. If a judge or jury at trial decides FOX is full of it, then fine. But if this motion was granted then FOX doesn't even have the chance to do that.

However, if you are sure that FOX's case is so bad that it doesn't even have a right to be heard on the merits, then prove it to me. That you are mad that they sat on their hands just isn't going to cut it.

They bought the property 17 years ago and did nothing with it as far as I'm concerned their statue of limitation has run out.

That's fine except that is not what a statute of limitations is L. A statute of Limitations refers to the length of time someone has to bring a lawsuit or file criminal charges. It has absolutely nothing to do with when the rights were acquired, but when the violation of those rights took place. In a statute of limitations issue the primary question and focus is when Time did what FOX is accusing them of doing and when FOX filed that suit. That's it.

And btw comparing this to a criminal case is one of the worst comparisons in the history of comparing something.

You completely miss the point.

My point was to explain how a motion to dismiss typically functions and what granting/denying it means. The criminal equivalent is exactly what I said it was and is something I'm more familiar with because I've had to oppose those motions all the time as well as filing my own. A motion to dismiss is similar to motion for directed verdict whether you think so or not.

Fox doesn't want to settle they want the movie TERMINATED

So go and protest FOX. You think their behavior is wrong, that their jerks and a**holes for waiting so long, or are simply doing this out of spite...fine, it doesn't bother me. You can go up to FOX and protest, write an angry letter, refuse to see their movies ever again, and hell, get your friends to do it too. You have the right to do all that, and if you can persuade FOX that what they are doing is wrong and to drop the suit (which they have almost the absolute right to do regardless of its merits) then more power to you. But, none of that has any bearing on the fundamental question of that lawsuit: Did FOX buy the license to make that movie and do they still have those rights?

FOX is petty for waiting so long to do something, only to complain now, but that doesn't change the fact they did buy the rights. I am not condoning their behavior, but I do object you calling the judge an idiot when he's most likely right just because you think FOX is an a**hole.

That you think they should expire if not used does not mean they do. The party selling those rights can always ask for a clause saying if it's unused it's forfeited or to simply put a hard cap on the length of that license and refuse to sell it if one is not included. What's Time Warner going to say if there is no such clause, that there should be a set time limit on such if licenses expire if unused even if the copyright holder or purchaser has no desire or is not astute enough to include one? For all I know, it might having something of that nature, but if it doesn't and the license is exclusive, should the judge just rewrite the terms of the license because people want to see the movie? What standard should he use, how long should it be, because a decision to do that effects all the other lawsuits filed in that court as well. No matter how bad you may want to see, you aren't entitled to do so.

If you think the law is wrong on such licenses then call your Congress and complain about it and ask for such a change in the law.

[FullmetalNinja25]

I apologize for some of the things I said but not all of it, I will not apologize for saying that 20th Century Fox has no right. If they ever even remotely planned on making a Watchmen movie they had their chance and now they are trying to ruin it for everyone else including the people that bled, sweat and cried for this movie during it's near 5 years in production. That is selfishness to the 9th degree I do not give a flying F what their motivations are, if they want a stake in how the movie does at the box office that's fine. But to try to wipe away the hard work of the writers, producers, actors and especially director Zack Snyder who worked his ass off to not only get this movie made but made sure everyone knew it was coming. I'll admit as a fan of the graphic novel I am biased in this situation but I feel I have a right to be I've waited for this movie for a freaking decade and I want my satisfaction. So 20th Century Fox and everyone that works there can kiss my ass.

Edited by L, 21 August 2008 - 02:01 AM.

[Kyuudaime]

This thread got some kicks out of me, but chill dude, it's not the end of the world.

[Cloud]

The way I see it, Fox has always been a thorn in my side. And has been more so this past year for releasing so many box office bombs like Meet Dave.

They cancel good shows and expect people to watch the crap they put on nowadays. *Sigh* I enjoy some of Fox's movies, I'll admit, but I think this time, they went too far.

[Nate River]

Again I apologize for some of the things I said but not all of it, I will not apologize for saying that 20th Century Fox has no right. If they ever even remotely planned on making a Watchmen movie they had their chance and now they are trying to ruin it for everyone else including the people that bled, sweat and cried for this movie during it's near 5 years in production. That is selfishness to the 9th degree I do not give a flying F what their motivations are, if they want a stake in how the movie does at the box office that's fine. But to try to wipe away the hard work of the writers, producers, actors and especially director Zack Snyder who worked his ass off to not only get this movie made but made sure everyone knew it was coming. I'll admit as a fan of the graphic novel I am biased in this situation but I feel I have a right to be I've waited for this movie for a freaking decade and I want my satisfaction. So 20th Century Fox and everyone that works there can kiss my ass.

Apology accepted, I was a bit over the top as well. I was unhappy because you basically called me stupid at least twice, not because you think they have no right or are unhappy about what they are doing.

Like I said, FOX could very well be in the wrong morally for doing this and you can punish them at the box office by not seeing their movies, but that doesn't mean they are legally wrong. One of Times's obligations is to make sure that no one else owns these rights before they make the movie and if someone does they are free to purchase those rights.

[FullmetalNinja25]

Apology accepted, I was a bit over the top as well. I was unhappy because you basically called me stupid at least twice, not because you think they have no right or are unhappy about what they are doing.

I didn't mean to call you stupid that wasn't my intention, I was just so pissed that I decided to lash out at anyone that defended Fox for this.

[Sakura Blossoms]

I didn't mean to call you stupid that wasn't my intention, I was just so pissed that I decided to lash out at anyone that defended Fox for this.

And I'm getting quite sick and tired, of having to mediate damn near EVERY ONE of your threads and posts.

Get your act together, and STOP 'lashing' out at people, every time someone or something in the world does something that you deem sacrilegious. And then tossing out random apologies every time you piss someone off, just doesn't cut it anymore. GET A GRIP ON YOUR TEMPER.

This is your FINAL warning about this.

[Destiny]

I really didn't think this thread was getting out of control.... Whatever though.


Anyway, the movie looks interesting. I'm really hoping they don't just terminate it, how awful if they did. So much money and time, makes me sick to my stomach. How is that right to the actors or crew or anyone that worked on it? Blah. hopefully Fox will just want a slice.

Edited by Destiny, 21 August 2008 - 03:15 AM.

[Sakura Blossoms]

I really didn't think this thread was getting out of control.... Whatever though.

That's because you don't know about 90% of the other threads made. It was only a matter of time.

[Pite]

I'm just wondering, why didn't Warner check it before they made the film if the rights were for sale. I'm sure here are records of such.

Even if they are old, the rights to the movie belong to FOX, yet it was a long time since they aquired them, heck they got them the year I took my first breath.

Edited by Pite, 21 August 2008 - 04:41 AM.

[Destiny]

That's because you don't know about 90% of the other threads made. It was only a matter of time.

Hope the whole "90%" thing wasn't a swipe towards me. I was just saying I thought this thread was cooling down. L apologized.


Awwww baby pite! haha.

[Nate River]

I'm just wondering, why didn't Warner check it before tey made the film if the rights were for sale. I'm sure here are records of such.

Even if they are old, the rights to the movie belong to FOX, yet it was a long time since tey aquired them, heck they got them the year I took my first breath.

That's a good question. The owner of the copyright can sell bits and pieces of it off to tons of people if it wants too, so you'd think that they would make sure the movie rights were truly exclusive, because if exclusive movie rights were sold to someone else, they can't be sold again until the original sale is terminated/ended. If it's sold twice the second recipient is SOL if the first still has their rights. Can't sell what you don't have.

[Sakura Blossoms]

Hope the whole "90%" thing wasn't a swipe towards me. I was just saying I thought this thread was cooling down. L apologized.


Awwww baby pite! haha.

Swipe? How is stating that 90% of his threads usually end up being closed, because they usually end up becoming shouting matches between him and others, taking a 'swipe' at you?

And there comes a point where apologizing doesn't mean much anymore, if you constantly have to be doing it, because you don't know how to address others properly without ticking them off somehow.

[Destiny]

lol OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH! Sorry love, thought you were saying I was ignorant to 90% of the threads here. I'm not one to be happy with people calling me ignorant, as many aren't. Hopefully you can see how I could make that misconception and forgive me for confusing you as well.

And I understand the whole "if you say sorry you must mean you will try your hardest to not let it happen again." I just felt that was awkward time to give him a last warning considering everyone was chill then.

Sorry once again for the mistake!

[FullmetalNinja25]

If Fox gets away with this this will be the biggest financial disaster Warner Bros. has had since Pluto Nash.

[Nate River]

If Fox gets away with this this will be the biggest financial disaster Warner Bros. has had since Pluto Nash.

Indeed, the money is spent, regardless of release and it will hurt, especially if they are banking on it doing well. Despite what FOX says, I still think this will ultimately settle with FOX giving up the rights for a cut of the profits. Unless, FOX is on the verge of making it's own hit, they are better off doing so. They make some of the money without having to endure the expense of making the movie themselves or expose themselves to the risk of it flopping.

[FullmetalNinja25]

Indeed, the money is spent, regardless of release and it will hurt, especially if they are banking on it doing well. Despite what FOX says, I still think this will ultimately settle with FOX giving up the rights for a cut of the profits. Unless, FOX is on the verge of making it's own hit, they are better off doing so. They make some of the money without having to endure the expense of making the movie themselves or expose themselves to the risk of it flopping.

FOX doesn't really have any high profile movies coming out til next Summer with X-Men Origins: Wolverine and Ice Age 3.

[krisk]

Oooo well that sux. D: i just saw the trailer (/lol late) and it looks niiiice. too bad that they had to cancel everything after getting so far. Though, i'm pretty sure that Fox just wants to get their foot in the door before they let them start things up from where they left off-- they see this as a huge opportunity and they just want a slice of the money pie, me thinks.

and they can't be heartless! they've seen all the work the production team has put in and such, i have a good feeling that they'll give rights then allow it to continue. XD

The world will look up and shout, "Save us..."

and I'll whisper back, "No."

i haven't read the comic so i know nothing of the characters, but i think that guy whispering is... FOX! dundundun... XD



and holy crap, this thread was like an emotional roller coaster on fire, being attacked by a killer shark-eagle thing...
too bad i missed out-- i wanted to go all, "SHUT UP. GO TAKE A SHOWER AND COME BACK COOLED DOWN, JEEBUS XD