Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > DVD Discussions > DVD Talk
Reload this Page >

60's Batman T.V. Show

Community
Search
DVD Talk Talk about DVDs and Movies on DVD including Covers and Cases

60's Batman T.V. Show

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-24-08 | 04:14 PM
  #201  
milo bloom's Avatar
DVD Talk Legend
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 18,989
Received 1,661 Likes on 1,201 Posts
From: Chicago suburbs
Originally Posted by bboisvert
As much as I hate these rights disputes and as much as I'd love to own Batman on DVD, that sounds supremely unfair to me.

Fox gets to make hundreds of millions of dollars but the folks who actually did the work for small change back in the 60s (and only contractually agreed to television airings) get nothing?
While this issue doesn't directly concern me as I just can't bring myself to watch this show, I realize it has a *lot* of fans, and the rights issues being discussed can affect all kinds of TV shows.

I agree that it would be unfair for only the studio releasing it to make money. But it's just never made sense to me that somebody can use something like a song in one medium, but then deny it's use for another. I can't remember the exact source of this old joke, but it's the first thing that comes to mind

"Madam, would you have sex with me for $10 million dollars?"
"Why, I believe I would."
"How about $50?"
"What kind of woman do you take me for?!"
"Madam, that's already been established, we're just negotiating price now."

To compare to song usage: if you've already agreed to let your song be used in a sitcom for TV airing, then the relationship has already been established. Sure you should get more money for a DVD release, but you shouldn't be able to completely stop it. What's needed is some sort of scale of payment that allows these people to still get paid something, but allow the studio to sell it at a reasonable price. Perhaps based on MSRP?

In cases like The Fugitive, where the studio claimed that they couldn't find everyone that contributed music, they could use this formula to set aside a certain amount of funds, then just release the damn thing intact and if somebody came forward and could prove they wrote it, then cut them a check from those funds for what they're due.

Last edited by milo bloom; 09-24-08 at 04:16 PM.
Old 09-24-08 | 05:35 PM
  #202  
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bboisvert
As much as I hate these rights disputes and as much as I'd love to own Batman on DVD, that sounds supremely unfair to me.

Fox gets to make hundreds of millions of dollars but the folks who actually did the work for small change back in the 60s (and only contractually agreed to television airings) get nothing?
That small change they got paid for was just thinking of some idea.
The one who had to pay them and hope he makes his money back had to be losing a lot of hair hoping not to go broke.
And then if the producer makes all this money he can then gamble again on someone else's idea or he can sail on his boat with young honeys till he's old like Hef.
Old 09-24-08 | 10:19 PM
  #203  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: West Monroe, Louisiana
Originally Posted by bboisvert
Ultimately, it depends on what the contracts say. Sammy Davis Jr.'s contract may have paid him for television distribution, but made no reference to any "alternate media". His estate would understandably want at least a small piece of the many million$ that Fox (or whoever) is going to be getting for this.
If the "I Dream of Jeannie" DVD release with Sammy Davis, Jr. is intact with him singing "Girl From Ipanema" and "Black Magic", then HIS estate shouldn't be a problem, or either Sony Pictures paid what the estate wanted, and yet managed to keep season 2 affordable!
Old 09-25-08 | 01:33 PM
  #204  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 14,259
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
From: Docking Bay 94
Originally Posted by wm lopez
That small change they got paid for was just thinking of some idea.
The one who had to pay them and hope he makes his money back had to be losing a lot of hair hoping not to go broke.
And then if the producer makes all this money he can then gamble again on someone else's idea or he can sail on his boat with young honeys till he's old like Hef.
Unfortunately, that's not what the contract says. The contract specifically says that they performed and were paid for television airings -- original and syndication.

The contract was not for any repackagings.


Sucks, but that's the reality. And I don't see how saying "screw them, they already got theirs" makes any logical sense.
Old 09-25-08 | 02:16 PM
  #205  
That'sAllFolks's Avatar
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,720
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Editor, The JEI
I can understand potential licensing issues with the Green Hornet characters, and possibly the George Barris Batmobile design, but why would a celebrity cameo factor in? Do walk-on actors, no matter how famous, typically retain any say about how a series is distributed?
Didn't Barris desingn the Munsters car? That didn't seem to cause any problems with the DVD release.
Old 09-25-08 | 05:12 PM
  #206  
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
[QUOTE=That'sAllFolks;8962885]Didn't Barris desingn the Munsters car? That didn't seem to cause any problems with the DVD release.[/QUOT

Good point , because they also have a theme music and make-up, custumes.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.