Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Royalties For Fred and Ethel Commercials

21 views
Skip to first unread message

Scot...@webtv.net

unread,
Jan 16, 2006, 11:00:01 PM1/16/06
to
Just wondering who is getting the money for the Fred and Ethel Medicare
commercials. Any living siblings of either person?

Davy McGlawn

unread,
Jan 19, 2006, 6:44:18 PM1/19/06
to
I don't believe, either Bill Frawley nor Vivian Vance had children, but I
want to think I may have heard Vivian had a sibling living, not long ago.
Bill's are probably all desceased, but I am not sure.
<Scot...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:19405-43C...@storefull-3234.bay.webtv.net...

John P. Mitchell

unread,
Jan 21, 2006, 8:16:13 PM1/21/06
to
> Just wondering who is getting the money for the Fred and Ethel Medicare
> commercials. Any living siblings of either person?


I would think it would be the owners of I Love Lucy (CBS and the Oppenheimer
family).


wolfman6

unread,
Jan 26, 2006, 10:50:47 PM1/26/06
to
It would definitely be the owners of the show, CBS and the Oppeheimer
family.

Back in those days and even up until the mid-70's, actors did not get
royalties for re-runs or the use of their images in other ways. Once they
got their paycheck, that was it. "I Love Lucy" was the first television
show to actually be filmed - all others up until Lucy were done live.
There was also no such thing as re-runs until CBS asked Desi if they could
re-run the show in the afternoons. Originally, shows did 39 episodes and
then took off 13 weeks in the summer. Other shows were then substituted
until the fall. No re-runs as we know today.

After other shows began re-running episodes, the actors started to demand
residuals, but it was only for a handful of re-runs of the show, example -
maybe the first three times the episode is repeated either on the network or
in syndication. After that, they got nothing. No one at that time thought
a show would re-run forever, just maybe a couple of runs and that would be
it. Their was also no such thing as home video. When home video came out,
the actor's demanded residuals from sales of video tapes of movies, then
when TV shows began being released on home video, the actor's demanded
residuals for that as well.

Often you hear about studios having to re-negotiate for the rights to music
used in a show or movie. Sometimes they end up changing the music because
they can't get the rights. This again was because no one foresaw re-runs or
home video. Music would be licensed for television airings only so to put
them on home video, the contracts had to be renegotitated. You would think
that would be a non-issue by now, but no one foresaw different formats of
video, so the original contracts would state that the music was licensed for
video tape. When laserdiscs came out, that would have to be re-negotiated
as well. Then when DVD came out, the negotiations continue because eah time
the licensing was done, it was for a specific video format. You still here
about shows being delayed or stalled and not being able to be released
because of music licensing problems. Hopefully now they are licensing for
any forthcoming formats, too, otherwise when High Def DVD's start coming
out, the studios will go through the negotiations again.

SAG was smart and negotiated for any sale, rental or use of the movie or tv
show no matter what venue.

Unfortunately for actors who did shows before residuals or when residuals
were limited, they get nothing for their original work these days whil the
studios are profiting big time from syndication and home video.

I doubt that Lucie Arnaz and Desi Jr get anything from "I Love Lucy' because
Lucy and Desi sold the show to CBS in the 50's and used the money to by RKO
studios, which they renamed Desilu Studios. In 1968, Lucy sold Desilu to
Gulf & Western, the owners of Paramount Pictures. The Arnaz children might
have some kind of deal with CBS since they are involved with some of the
merchandising and the Lucy Museum. I don't know what their exact
involvement is.


"John P. Mitchell" <go...@atlanticbb.net> wrote in message
news:11t5nah...@corp.supernews.com...

Scot...@webtv.net

unread,
Jan 27, 2006, 9:12:07 PM1/27/06
to
Great post Wolfman. I did read where Oppenheimer chose not to sell his
part. I bet Gregg (his son) has a very comfortable life due to this. I
wonder how Desi Jr and Lucie Arnazs life would be if Lucille Ball hadn't
sold the studio. That had to be one of the worst things she could have
done.

Wiseguy

unread,
May 18, 2011, 7:42:45 AM5/18/11
to
"wolfman6" <x...@xxx.com> wrote in
news:rMgCf.49238$tK4....@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com:

> It would definitely be the owners of the show, CBS and the Oppeheimer
> family.
>
> Back in those days and even up until the mid-70's, actors did not get
> royalties for re-runs or the use of their images in other ways. Once
> they got their paycheck, that was it. "I Love Lucy" was the first
> television show to actually be filmed - all others up until Lucy were
> done live.


Not true. The Life of Riley with Jackie Gleason was filmed in 1949. I
Love Lucy was the first TV show to be filmed...in front of an audience.

0 new messages