|
"Quincy" on the warpath! Klugman sues NBC
http://www.inthenews.co.uk/photo/pho...011838$180.jpg
Originally Posted by <A HREF="http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/jack-klugman-sues-nbc-uni-over-quincy-me-profit-accounting/" target="_blank" style="Text-decoration:none">Nikki Finke</a>
The complaint was filed today in Los Angeles Superior Court. This really sounds like one of the worst cases of phony-baloney studio accounting, not to mention sheer arrogance, in Hollywood history. Geez, when is Big Media going to stop this larceny? For instance, according to the lawsuit, NBC Uni is claiming that, as of the end of fiscal year 2006, Quincy M.E. has accumulated over $66 million in net losses -- this after we all know that the 1976-1983 series is a classic shown all over the world even to this day. Through his Beverly Hills attorneys Johnson & Johnson, Klugman just gave this statement to me: "I don’t want their money. I want my money. I can’t believe they’ve collected over $250 million dollars and they say they are still in the hole. I have 28% of the net and they won’t even give me a copy of my contract. I worked for them for almost 8 years. I got up at 4 o’clock in the morning. I would rewrite. I did a ton of work. It’s on every day. I haven’t gotten a penny for years."
Worse, the lawsuit claims that when Klugman asked to see his paperwork with NBC Uni, the network and studio "have refused to give Plaintiffs a copy of the contract". So on June 21, 2007, Klugman’s attorney wrote a letter to NBC Uni requesting "a copy of any and all contracts pertaining to Klugman and Quincy M.E." On September 26, 2007, NBC Uni responded that it's “unable to comply with your request … because it is NBC Universal’s policy not to provide copies of talent contracts or other confidential documents.” The lawsuit notes that, under the terms of the NBC Uni contract, Klugman and his company Sweater Productions are entitled to a “Participant Share” of 25% of all “net profits” attributable to Quincy M.E. But NBC is required to "properly account" for the net profits to Sweater/Klugman which has a right to audit the records of NBC Uni if a dispute arises. On March 5, 2008, Klugman’s attorney gave notice to NBC Uni of Klugman’s intent to audit the TV series. "net profits" = bad<li>And the film/tv/music companies have the gall to complain about acts of piracy!</li></ol> Whatever the rights and wrongs of the original contract, I sincerely hope the tv company ends up with egg on its face. Quincy airs daily on UK digital television and I believe that the only way it is losing money is through creative accountancy designed to avoid taxation &/or paying the "talent". How is it that people like Klugman and before him Garner, Duchovny and Jackson have to resort to the law to establish basic rights such as auditing the accounts to check their royalty entitlements? |
Wow. I hope Jack can work this out.
I still watch "Quincy" at least once a week on KDOC 56 here in LA. I do admit I watch it so I can trip off of JK's over the top acting, the 70's styles, and 70's social issues like Female Vietnam Vets. |
Originally Posted by benedict
How is it that people like Klugman and before him Garner, Duchovny and Jackson have to resort to the law to establish basic rights such as auditing the accounts to check their royalty entitlements?
|
His case will likely drag on and on due to one lone holdout juror.
|
Originally Posted by Charlie Goose
His case will likely drag on and on due to one lone holdout juror.
|
JMS (Babylon 5 creator) had a joke about this - something about a studio burning down in Africa being charged against B5's profits.
He said in 2006 that the DVD sets "The DVD sales have raised over 500 million in revenue." But the show is supposedly still in the negative. :lol: It has sounded to me that this kind of profit-figuring is pretty common in the industry. |
Along the same lines, hasn't New Line been arguing that the LOTR trilogy also lost money?
|
This is the reason that powerful actors now demand a percentage of the gross. Everything that comes out of Hollywood loses big money once their bookkeepers calculate the net.
|
I hope NBC/Universal gets crushed during discovery. I hope that Klugman’s attorneys are smart, they will request all kinds of documents pertaining not only to Klugman, but also to their accounting practices in general. I also hope that some of those documents will be leaked online.
|
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
Lucky for Jack it's a civil trial and he only needs 75% to agree with him.
|
Originally Posted by benedict
I'm usually fairly "up" when it comes to who is still with us but I genuinely thought JK had died back in the 90s!
|
Originally Posted by benedict
So you're saying it won't ironically mirror the trial in "12 Angry Men" in which he played Juror #5....
|
Originally Posted by Palaver
I'm with you there. I sincerely thought the same thing. I had to stare at the headline for a while wondering if I had entered some sort of parallel universe.
|
Originally Posted by rennervision
I think you guys are thinking of Tony Randall.
|
I think people are remembering that he had cancer a while back (losing a vocal cord) and just assumed he had succumbed.
|
If this guy isnt even getting a copy of his contract where is he getting the figures that say the show has made over $250 million for the studio?
Also i call bullshit on the B5 sets grossing over $500 million. |
$500 million would be 10 million sets at $50 each, right? How many seasons of B5 were there? I'm going to guess 5. That's 2 million people buying all of them. I'm not sure I see reason for disbelief.
|
I doubt 2 million people own these sets and i am sure the ones who do own all didnt pay $50 per set. This is just my opinion and guess though but I really dont have a strong feeling these sets were not a huge cash cow like whoever said they were said.
|
Originally Posted by Jimmy James
$500 million would be 10 million sets at $50 each, right? How many seasons of B5 were there? I'm going to guess 5. That's 2 million people buying all of them. I'm not sure I see reason for disbelief.
Plus, it ran in syndication for a while on Sci-Fi, there were VHS tapes, and the DVDs. And toys and junk. (BTW: Season sets were like $100 MSRP originally, like Star Trek, IIRC...I paid $60-$80 each). So in ALL the years it has existed, it has made NO money, but has lost the studio money and has been a net negative the entirety of its existence. Does that really make sense? Would the show have run 5 years if it REALLY cost that much? |
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
Lucky for Jack it's a civil trial and he only needs 75% to agree with him.
|
My idle speculation is that the entity that agrees to these deals then agree to sweetheart deals with sister corporations who earn the profit, saddling the production with all the expenses and little of the revenue.
|
I like how Jack waits until his estranged wife, Brett Somers, finally dies before going after this money. At least he gave her a 6-month grieving period. :lol:
|
Originally Posted by Jimmy James
$500 million would be 10 million sets at $50 each, right? How many seasons of B5 were there? I'm going to guess 5. That's 2 million people buying all of them. I'm not sure I see reason for disbelief.
|
A quick search indicates that the two Seinfeld sets released first (1/2 and 3) sold around a combined 4 million units as of 2004.
|
Originally Posted by actionjackson29
Aren't Chapelle's Show and Family Guy like the top selling tv-on-dvds of all time? I think remember seeing that they sold like 2 million sets, so I don't really that B5 has sold that many. I think the main point he was trying to make is the show stayed on the air for 5 years, made multiple movies afterwards, sold well on dvd, may continue on dvd, how the hell would all that happen if it wasn't making money?
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:27 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.