The Man From UNCLE?? - Page 6

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

I hate to take the sides of the giant corporate monsters but in this case I have to think they are right. Some woman supposedly got these rights from Norman Felton, not from Warner. First off, Felton just turned 93. I've never spoken to him but my mom is in her 80s and she's lucky if she knows who I am. Do you really think he is in any condition at that age to be negotiating rights deals? Of which I seriously doubt he owns anyway. And even if he did retain some rights, which is questionable, he certainly doesn't own them outright. So, no, I don't blame Warner here as I think this person tried to get cute and do an end run around them and thought she'd get away with it. Not gonna happen on a show this popular and well known. Had she wanted to do it with some obscure 50s show, I don't think anyone would have bothered her but UNCLE has way too high a profile.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

therefore all the more reason why I fail to understand why a reputable organisation like AB didnt do their research correctly in the first place! it doesnt make sense...
I wrote a letter to AB asking a simple question and of course no reply...thinking about it it sums up their attitude to members of the public...
Over to Warner now to get this classic series released asap..

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

And-I wonder if that woman is Lindsay Dunlap, who "supposedly" had the rights to make a new UNCLE film....
If this is indeed the case, see my other two posts...

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

I had a feeling something like this had happened. Somebody's thought they had more rights than they were entitled to. Norman Felton would have the rights to the characters and format as creator of the series - which would be fine if you wanted to remake the series.

I suspect the first thing Warner knew about it was when AB requested the series from the vault.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Indeed it is.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Guys, keep in mind that the person who licensed the show to AB had the masters, and behind-the-scenes material that was shot when the series was in production. It's not like someone walked in off the street and said, "I own the rights to this show, gimme some cash."

Can't we accept that something went screwy and not assign blame?

Gord

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Gord that may be the case but I would have imagined AB would have done a thorough search before announcing the release. It is well known that Warners in all certaity hold the rights hence the exchange of Lawyers letters.
Whatever the outcome the upsetting thing about this is that the release will be pushed back indefinately as neither side will capitulate until the matter is settled in court anf that could take years and years...
The DVD buying public are the 100% losers!

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

This is all very disappointing indeed.
I can't understand how there would be more than one master copy of an episode? Copies yes, but only one master surely? And the master would surely be in the physical possession of Warners or are we saying that they had not yet noticed that they didn't have the series in their vaults?

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

I don't believe that it is a well-known certainty that Warner is in the right. Just because Warner is big doesn't mean that they can't make a mistake. AB must have a legal basis that they believe that they do have the rights to release it. You don't spend thousands of dollars unless you do your homework.

Everyone wants to dump on everyone but Warner. Maybe Warner is the one trying to claim more rights than they are entitled to. They may have decided to use their deep pockets to try and outwait AB.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Depends on what's being referred to as "masters". There is probably 1 set of negatives, although possibly more. However, there are usually several 35 prints of each episode that are struck directly from the negatives. I can't speak for every series but I can tell you for example that My Favorite Martian has multiple 35mm prints on each episode. Which was why it was so laughable when Rhino claimed they couldn't find several episodes in non-sped up form. But that's another story for another thread. But getting back to the original comment, almost all shows, filmed and taped both, have numerous copies which can be considered "masters".

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Gord, nobody would be apportioning blame if the rest of us were in full possession of the facts. We can only surmise what the hell is going on from what people tell us in threads like this.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Just a brief comment here, Mark, but it occurred to me long before I read your post that all of our speculating here regarding The Man from U.N.C.L.E.'s release not happening due to possible rights issues may be the actual reason Anchor Bay removed it from their website.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

i doubt it...whilst HT Forum is most influential I do not believe a thread (as important as it is) can persuade AB to remove the info...

I strongly believe Warners do own the rights outright and the lawyers have made a further request for the announcement to be removed...

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

If you've followed this thread from day one, it started out as a "will this ever be released" reminiscence thread. Most posters were discussing episode lengths (in view of syndication prints being used for a theoretical release). Some of us were skeptical the show would ever be released. (I still think Warner may have some aversion to releasing the show for some reason).

When the announcement came up that Anchor Bay were planning a release, it was only logical to surmise that they had acquired the rights from a third party, as Warner are on record (at least their theatrical division) as saying they do not license out material. When the release was suddenly pulled in dispute with Warner, it was also obvious somebody had not done their homework over said rights. The parties involved in any rights would be Arena Productions (Norman Felton and Sam Rolfe as creators of the show) and Warner Bros as owners of the filmed material acquired from MGM via Ted Turner.

The only "concrete" information any of us can work with is what Gord finds out on his site, and Michael Alden's posts with regards who may have acquired the remake rights and attempted to license those on as rights to the original series.

We don't know if there is any "blame" to assign as everything was most likely done in all innocence (as copyright law is becoming progressively more needlessly complex). Hopefully the situation will blow over and either AB will be able to continue with their release, or Warner will get the message there is a market for the series and release it. Worst case scenario is it will end up buried deeper in the vault.

With a vacuum of proper information to go on, those of us who would dearly like to see a release need something to talk about, if only to keep this damn thread alive.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

If this is the case then why does Warners treat the show as a forgotten show that no one will buy and seems to have Zero interest in releasing it even though fans have been requesting its release on DVD for several years now. This is just corporate greed and Warners hoarding shows they won't release and keeping them from the fans.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Because corporate mentality works as follows:

1 - If we license something out and it does well, we look bad because we didn't issue it ourselves. And we will be putting more product on the market, which competes with our product.

2 - We need to make X profit to make it worth the effort. If it's not going to reach a certain profit level, it's just not worth it to us.

To those of us who are fans of certain shows, these things have meaning for us, beyond just being television shows. To the studios, producers, etc, there is no emotional attachment. They are no different to them than any commodity. No different than a pile of fertilizer. They either have commercial value or they don't and if they don't, there's no reasoning with them on any level.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

You should write a textbook! That is absolutely dead-on!

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Consider the possibility that some of those corporate types may have grown up on Man from U.N.C.L.E. reruns (as I did as a teen in the 1980s), and just aren't ready to release that series on DVD because there are so many other shows that they feel will appeal to a larger audience and thus turn a larger profit first. With that in mind, it's only a matter of time until U.N.C.L.E. is released. Maybe even this July as planned.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Except the show did not have a great syndication and unless you were around when it originally aired in the 60s, you would have no idea of the popularity. The whole PTA anti-violence crusade of the early 70s virtually killed the syndication of the show. The only runs it's had in the last 25, save for the couple of local stations around the country, was on CBN in the mid-80s when few people had cable yet and then on TNT in the late 80s thru the 90s but usually in the middle of the night. It's just been one of those shows that was hugely popular in it's time, (Laugh-In, Ed Sullivan, Mod Squad) that did not sustain the popularity with younger audiences.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

It's entirely possible some benighted bean-counter at Warner uses syndication outings as an indication of DVD viability, in which case UNCLE is well and truly THRUSHed.

I've been peering at the small print on my R2 movies box set, and although the discs are released by Warner Bros, they have Turner Communications copyrights all over them.

I had been wondering if the split-ownership question of rights might be what holds up most of the great 60s tv shows. The UNCLE deal seems to have crashed because Arena Productions' rights were the wrong ones. BATMAN hasn't seen the light of day, and I'm wondering if maybe it's nothing to do with DC Comics but Greenlawn Productions. Was there a similar production entity for Mission Impossible?

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

I wasn't around when U.N.C.L.E. first ared in the 1960s, yet I know of it's huge popularity from having once collected some old TV GUIDEs from that period, including one from 1966 with Solo & Kuryakin on the cover hanging from a helicopter. The article itself was about the show's big following and Dave McCallum's fans, particularly among college students.
Yet Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In resurfaced in a few DVD releases in recent years with commentaries by some of the original regulars, and in the 1990s and 2000s there have been multiple syndicated versions and DVDs of The Ed Sullivan Show -- a program which in its original run lasted 23 years and appealed to more than one generation!

I agree regarding The Mod Squad though. The late 1990s remake was a disaster, but at least it was a reminder that everything comes back eventually.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

The Digital Bits posted this today
http://digitalbits.com/#mytwocents

Does this mean the rights issues were resolved or are they just reporting the "release" late ?

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

The Bits is on the ball enough not to report what is simply an old release date. If they are reporting it, I would bet it is coming out that day.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

That was my thought exactly. I'm certain they were aware of the rights issue all along.

While the title is not listed on DDD or Amazon.com, it is listed on Amazon.ca and indicates the 7/25 release date. Anyone know if Amazon Canada had this listed since the first announcement or whether they just recently replaced the listing for MFU S1?

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Amazon.Ca has had the Man from U.N.C.L.E. DVD listing active all along, so that's not an indicator. I guess we'll just have to wait for word from the gentlemen at the TV Shows on DVD website to see what they've heard...

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Latest word - it's still up in the air.

Gord

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Bruce Campbell commented:
> It is well known that Warners in all certaity hold the rights... <<br />
Actually, that is not well known, and in fact isn't even true.

What a lot of people don't realize about copyrights is that they're not an all or nothing thing. Certain specific rights, e.g. theatrical presentation, or broadcast rights can be divested, while other rights are retained. So a lot of issues are venue-specific, contributing to the controversy over who owns the rights for DVD distribution. These are sometimes referred to as "ancillary rights".

I certainly don't know the whole story behind the rather twisted history, but I do know a few tidbits, which I'll pass on in summary, and perhaps others can augment.

When MFU was created, it was the brainchild of Norman Felton and Sam Rolfe. It was jointly owned by MGM, and Arena Productions (owned by Norm). So, it was a partnership from the beginning, with no one holding exclusive rights.

MGM went through a lot of financial hard times in the 70's and 80's, and wound up being sold and re-sold multiple times, with various assets being spun off to different investors/buyers. It's actually quite complex and convoluted. At one point, Turner purchased MGM/UA, but due to inability to retain funding, was forced to almost immediately re-sell it (in 74 days), with the exception of their film library and rights. This allowed them to air MFU on their cable channels, and release VHS tapes of some of the episodes.

In terms of fascinating acquisitions... "In the aftermath of the 1948 anti-trust suit, uncertain times led Warners in 1956 to sell its 650 of its pre-1948 films and cartoons to a holding company which became Associated Artists Productions (AAP). Two years later AAP sold its holdings to United Artists (UA), which held them until 1981, when MGM bought UA. Three years later Turner Broadcasting System, having failed to buy MGM, settled for ownership of the MGM/UA library. This included all pre-1986 MGM features as well as the pre-1948 Warner material. Ownership of the classic Warner films came full-circle when Time Warner bought Turner, although technically they are held by Turner Entertainment while Warner is responsible for sales and distribution." (from Wikipedia)

[Warner later (2004) made an unsuccessful bid to buy MGM again, to acquire their post-1986 libraries, but lost out to Sony, who raised $5 billion.]

Back in '93, Sam Rolfe confirmed, "Turner owns half of The Man from U.N.C.L.E. Having bought the Metro library, Turner has now taken over Metro's ownership. Arena Productions is the partner who owns the other half. Arena Productions is Norman Felton's company." So apparently it was a 50/50 split, with either side having the ability to block the other, in the event of disagreements that couldn't be resolved in a mutually-satisfactory fashion.

What's kind of interesting to me is that all that gets discussed is film rights, which I think of as movies, though episodic TV shows were shot on film as well. But TV shows wouldn't necessarily automatically be bundled with movies.

From Wikipedia, "How much of MGM's back catalogue Turner actually got was a point of conflict for a time; eventually it was determined that Turner owned all of the MGM library, dating back to pre-merger days, as well as the extensive UA library, which comprised of the pre-1948 Warner Bros. catalogue, the entire RKO library, and a good share of United Artists's own backlist."

When Warner later purchased Turner Entertainment and made them a subsidiary, they inherited those rights. But Norm's company Arena still retained his rights to MFU, never having released them. Norm's getting on in years (~93 now) and hasn't been able to actively be involved in any of this stuff for some time, but one of his off-spring (a niece or grand-niece?) named Lindsey has wanted to bring MFU back into the light of day... and hence Ember Entertainment was born ("ember", as in the last dying flames from a fire), hoping to bring it back to life again with a long-overdue DVD release. Lindsey posted for a while on the message boards at IMDB.com, but going back, I wasn't able to find any of them, so they may have been deleted.

I'm reasonably sure that Ember Entertainment properly secured both the rights and source materials from Arena (Norm), when they proceded to approach Anchor Bay. Perhaps they felt that Turner's claims didn't extend to a DVD release, or there are some other factors involved. Unfortunately, nobody's talking.

But on the face of it, it would appear that Ember didn't have exclusive rights, and that left the door open to Warner to stick their foot in, based on their Turner holdings. Being the generous company they are , I'm sure WB has absolutely no intention of waiving whatever rights they may still hold. Even if they actually hold none, which seems unlikely, they can dispute the claim and keep Ember and Anchor Bay from proceeding via injunctions, and tie them up in the courts for years... if that is their desire. And apparently, it is. Neither Arena nor Ember has any clout, both being one person entities, with no deep pockets.

Frankly, since Warner has sat on it for 40 years now (assuming they have the rights they claim), and made no moves whatsoever to distribute or capitalize on it, it seems dubious they have any intention of doing so in the future. OTOH, perhaps I'm wrong, and their "master plan" is to sit on it for another 40 years until anyone who has any memory of it whatsoever is dead and buried, before they release box sets with major fanfare.

I'd be very curious to know what rights Warner is claiming at this point, and if they're just asking for a piece of the action, or using their position and clout to shut it down completely. I'm sure if any information comes to light, Gord over at www.tvshowsondvd.com will let us know about it.

- Tim

P.S. Besides www.Wikipedia.com, which has lots of good historical information on the major players in this fiasco (the Time-Warner mega conglomerate, Turner Entertainment, MGM, etc.) that is interesting reading, there are also good tidbits over at www.manfromuncle.org as well, and www.answers.com.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Great post, Tim!

Gord

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Well, exactly where does it say that Ember or Arena can do whatever they want with a property that they own 50% of? That's like buying a house with somebody and then deciding to sell it without telling them or asking them. How can you do something with an entity that you only own half of? So you just proved that Warner is right. They own half of the rights and apparently they were never consulted and never signed off on the deal. So what would make whoever is representing Arena think they could go ahead with something they only own half the rights to? And shame on Anchor Bay for not looking into this before getting involved.

Re: The Man From UNCLE??

Hi, Michael.
> How can you do something with an entity that you only own half of? <<br />
Did you read my comments on copyrights being separable, with various rights being distributed to different parties? Although at it's inception, there may have been a 50/50 split of all rights, with half of all income going to each partner equally, it's possible that at some point Arena negotiated a distribution that gave MGM a greater (or full) proportion of some rights, in exchange for a larger portion of other rights. It's not necessarily as cut and dried as you make it out to be.

I'm not privy to what went on, but it's entirely possible that there may have been an agreement at some point which led Arena/Ember to expect that they were fully justified in proceeding with a DVD release. They may have been incorrect in their assessment, or they may have been 100% justified, and in either case Warner could still try to stop them if they felt that potential money (however small) was slipping through their fingers.

That's precisely the problem here... since we don't know the particulars, we can only speculate what may have been going on. Anchor Bay may very well have done the legal examination of the contracts and documents, and be completely in the right... and yet have Warner threaten to sue them anyway. It does happen. OTOH, it's also possible the scenario unfolded as you laid out, and that Ember and/or AB should have known better.

It seems like you're very quick to side with Warner, yet it would seem very odd to me for AB to proceed with the project if things were as clear-cut in Warner's favor as you believe them to be. That would be extremely foolish, and poor business practice on their part. I just don't buy it.

I hope someday we get the straight scoop on this, and that Warner/AB can come to some agreement that allows the series to (finally) be released. Isn't 40 years long enough to wait? Ember has been wanting to get these out for years now, and finally found a distribution partner with Anchor Bay. And Warner's contribution is to "just say no"?

- Tim