something I saw on the officail movie site.....
no one
HARRY POTTER, characters, names and related indicia and WARNER BROS., shield
logo and related indicia are trademarks of Warner Bros. TM & © 2001.
Does that mean JK has given up the rights and sind them all over to Warner
Bros? Would that mean that they could bring out a Harry Potter movie not
bassed on the books at all??
Just curious,
MJ
Terry Eden
news:I%7K7.474$_3....@news.iol.ie...
I've been wondering about this... I would have thought that JKR would have
licenced the characters etc to WB. As it stands, it looks like WB own the
whole kit and caboodle. Unless JKR has a pretty nifty contract, I don't
see what could stop her publishing a Harry Potter book which WB don't like.
Imagine if book 5 contain two characters called Barner and Wros who wanted
to make a movie of Harry's life and went out of their way to put him in
danger to increace box office takings... Or if Ron decided he was gay... Do
you honestly think WB would let her publish that?
Worrying...
Terry
--
___________________________________________________________________________
___
Certified 100% virus-free and safe to trust with your life by Wally
AntiVirus,
cos a real e-mail virus wouldn't lie to you with a message like this would
it?
To reply, change "deadspam.com" to "uea.ac.uk"
Anna
when one of their employees read book one and was moved to tears. At that
time HP was not at all the phenomenon it is today. So of course JK was
happy for the hundred thousand dollars (I think) she was offered at the
time. But she does have the right to sanction things both with regards to
the film and all the merchandise. She has managed to get a great influence
on everything HP, which can only be a good thing
Anna
RCLOVELY
>Warner Brothers bought the film rights etc quite a while ago pretty cheaply
The film rights were sold for $700,000, but JKR gets a percentage of the
profits, and probably royalties on all the merchandising. She isn't called a
very astute business woman for nothing!
RC
William Elsom
"Terry Eden" <T.E...@deadspam.com> wrote in message
news:9tbam7$1gr4b$1...@ID-89774.news.dfncis.de...
> "no one" <no...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
> news:I%7K7.474$_3....@news.iol.ie...
> > Just a thought, I read this on the Official Harry Potter Movie site:
> >
> > HARRY POTTER, characters, names and related indicia and WARNER BROS.,
> shield
> > logo and related indicia are trademarks of Warner Bros. TM & © 2001.
> >
> > Does that mean JK has given up the rights and sind them all over to
> Warner
> > Bros? Would that mean that they could bring out a Harry Potter movie not
> > bassed on the books at all??
>
Almost certainly not.
The way licensing works for TV is as follows.
For Quantum Leap, (as an example) Donald Bellasario retains the copyright
and the right to make new series and/or a movie. (We can dream....) In the
meantime, Berkely Boulevard were licensed to produce a series of novels,
which were continued until they stopped selling well enough. Berkely can (a)
publish books, (b) introduce major characters for one book only, and (c)
imply the state of play before the final show. They cannot (a) write post
final episode books, (b) kill off any characters or (c) do anything that DPB
"wouldn't like".
For Harry Potter, the same maxim will liekly apply, but with the book
preceding the screen version, JKR holds the trump card. I think the likely
scenario is that Warner Bros have the right to sell merchandise, put a
copyright logo on its website and make the movie.
Allowing that JKR gave virtually no ground on the content of the current
movie, I doubt that she will let a small concern like Warner Bros dictate
who Harry Potter dates in the fourth form, or any other plot considerations.
This would actually be a decent question to pose to JKR in a chat session on
the HP website.
Will
--
To discuss this or any other topic with me, please remove the obvious anti
spam element of my e-mail address.
=totem=
| Just a thought, I read this on the Official Harry Potter Movie site:
|
| HARRY POTTER, characters, names and related indicia and WARNER BROS.,
shield
|
| Does that mean JK has given up the rights and sind them all over to Warner
| Bros? Would that mean that they could bring out a Harry Potter movie not
| bassed on the books at all??
I think that is not the case.
First of all, remember it is BOOKS that are a phenomenon, and movie will
always convey much less story than a book; you just can't cram all that
action into 2-or-so hours. Just read some reviews on this group.
Second, AFAIK, JKR only sold rights to first 3 books with OPTION to extend
the contract onto the others.
Third, last but not least, If JKR gets into a dispute with WB, all she has
to do is to say publicly, "I don't like what WB wants to do in the movie, I
think it will be pile of Dragon Dung" - now which abysmally stupid fan would
go and see it? Just imagine those piles of howlers and barrels of bubotuber
pus flying WB's way :-)
HP World is governed by these three rules:
1) you can never win with JKR.
2) JKR knows better and is always right.
3) If she isn't right, see rule 1...
=t=
unterhund
news:9tdsmd$aqp$1...@news.onet.pl...
> Third, last but not least, If JKR gets into a dispute with WB, all
she has
> to do is to say publicly, "I don't like what WB wants to do in the
movie, I
> think it will be pile of Dragon Dung" - now which abysmally stupid
fan would
> go and see it?
These people exist. You want names? I don't think they're *that*
stupid.
--
Patrick Clark
unte...@lycos.com
http://unterhund.8m.com