-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

More SFM owned shows coming to BOD!


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

#41 of 98 los.sa

los.sa

    Auditioning

  • 6 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 29 2014
  • Real Name:Losa

Posted August 30 2014 - 08:51 AM

 

It sure doesn't sound like their hatred lasted very long...
 
 

 

 

I've never heard of insurance money having to be directed towards a specific purpose. They're being compensated for their loss, but what they do with that compensation is their business.

 

Not when you are doing Insurance for very specific assets, especially when the insurance is for the very assets that the companies value is based upon.



#42 of 98 Ron1973

Ron1973

    Beverly Hillbilles nut extraordinaire

  • 1,121 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 26 2012
  • Real Name:Ron Reagan (not that one!)
  • LocationSE Missouri

Posted August 30 2014 - 08:59 AM

Not when you are doing Insurance for very specific assets, especially when the insurance is for the very assets that the companies value is based upon.

What state is your insurance license from and how long have you been an agent?


Find me on Facebook

 

My blog

 

Jethro, how come there's no ice in Californy? ~ Uncle Jed

 

Don't look at me, I didn't take it! ~ Jethro


#43 of 98 los.sa

los.sa

    Auditioning

  • 6 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 29 2014
  • Real Name:Losa

Posted August 31 2014 - 08:07 PM

What state is your insurance license from and how long have you been an agent?

Moved alot and have been licensed in Cali, NV NY, FL, CT & AZ & OVER 40 YEARS



#44 of 98 Neil Brock

Neil Brock

    Screenwriter

  • 2,089 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 29 2009

Posted September 02 2014 - 08:41 AM

 

The only thing to consider is:
 
1. The Jean Hagen episodes have not been rebroadcast for 50 years
 
2. The Jean Hagen episodes have never been in the syndication package
 
3. A previous attempt to release the show contained no Jean Hagen episodes
 
4. Current plans by the distributor to release the show will not include the Jean Hagen episodes
 
5. Both Hagen and Thomas have publicly acknowledged their mutual dislike.
 
6. You won't be seeing any Jean Hagen episodes



Add to the list:

7. The Hagen episodes did not have their copyrights properly renewed. When the 28 year original copyrights expired, which would have been 1982-85, they were not renewed. They tried to do a bogus renewal in 1987 or so, which was too late and all of those seasons had fallen into public domain at that point.

#45 of 98 jimmyjet

jimmyjet

    Screenwriter

  • 1,915 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2009

Posted September 02 2014 - 08:59 AM

 


Add to the list:

7. The Hagen episodes did not have their copyrights properly renewed. When the 28 year original copyrights expired, which would have been 1982-85, they were not renewed. They tried to do a bogus renewal in 1987 or so, which was too late and all of those seasons had fallen into public domain at that point.

 

actually, this is a better sign that we will get them released.

 

the fact that they attempted to get them copyrighted says a lot.

 

all this dispute between hagen and thomas - i am betting is way overblown

 

come on - hagen died in 77, thomas in 91

 

just what sort of damage was thomas gonna do to a dead person ?

 

just because 3-4 seasons of a 11-season show is in public domain, isnt gonna prevent them from releasing it

 

another company would still need to do the upgrade process, etc.

 

if the estate put out the first seasons, along with the rest of them, as a package - what other company would even find it worthwhile to put out 3-4 seasons of the show from the public domain ?

 

i suspect we will eventually see all 11 seasons on dvd, blu-ray or whatever disc is current at the time of the release.



#46 of 98 Joe Lugoff

Joe Lugoff

    Screenwriter

  • 2,016 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 2005
  • Real Name:Joe

Posted September 02 2014 - 06:05 PM

You know, regardless of any other considerations, it's really a shame that Seasons 1 through 3 of Make Room for Daddy are being treated as if they never existed, because of this:

 

At the 1954 Emmy Awards, the show won "Best New Series."

 

At the 1955 Emmy Awards, it won "Best Situation Comedy," beating The George Burns and Gracie Allen Show, Mr. Peepers, Our Miss Brooks, Private Secretary, and this little thing called I Love Lucy.

 

That year, Thomas won Best Actor in a series, and that included dramas as well as comedies.  (And Jean Hagen was nominated, but in the "Supporting Actress" category.)

 

The next year, it was nominated in all these categories -- and Hagen was nominated this time as Best Actress AND as Supporting Actress.  If anyone can figure that out, let me know.

 

Anyway, my point is, these seasons which are hidden from view forever for mysterious and probably petty reasons were very highly regarded in their day.  If they're that good, you'd think the family would want them to be seen.

 

This series, all eleven years of it, is surely Danny Thomas's legacy.  It was one of the most successful and awarded sitcoms in the so-called "golden age" of television.  But we have to pretend 3/11 of it never existed, I guess.


  • LeoA and LouA like this

#47 of 98 jimmyjet

jimmyjet

    Screenwriter

  • 1,915 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2009

Posted September 02 2014 - 08:12 PM

hi joe,

 

it will come out, eventually.

 

the public domain aspect of it is not really the problem.

 

as i stated before, the estate could pay the bucks to spruce them up to dvd or blu.

 

and if there was really still a concern, they could follow sam nelson's lead.

 

i dont know if it will make the first release, but he has all sorts of personal tidbits that will eventually be part of the product.

 

the thomas family has been around a long time in show business.

 

they no doubt have large amounts of memorabilia that could be placed on the seasons 1-3 discs, that no other releaser would have access to.

 

the 2 episodes that i posted may have been the first 2 from the series ?

 

and they were quite good.

 

so, as you stated, it has nothing to do with the quality of the show.  and that is very much in our favor.

 

there is no doubt in my mind that the first 3 years would be just as popular as the other ones.  it is a very good show.



#48 of 98 Lord Dalek

Lord Dalek

    Screenwriter

  • 2,085 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 04 2005

Posted September 03 2014 - 06:10 PM

Would be cool if they could get Laugh-In out but I imagine music clearances is a problem.



#49 of 98 Ron1973

Ron1973

    Beverly Hillbilles nut extraordinaire

  • 1,121 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 26 2012
  • Real Name:Ron Reagan (not that one!)
  • LocationSE Missouri

Posted September 03 2014 - 07:09 PM

*
POPULAR

hi joe,

 

it will come out, eventually.

 

the public domain aspect of it is not really the problem.

 

as i stated before, the estate could pay the bucks to spruce them up to dvd or blu.

 

and if there was really still a concern, they could follow sam nelson's lead.

 

i dont know if it will make the first release, but he has all sorts of personal tidbits that will eventually be part of the product.

 

the thomas family has been around a long time in show business.

 

they no doubt have large amounts of memorabilia that could be placed on the seasons 1-3 discs, that no other releaser would have access to.

 

the 2 episodes that i posted may have been the first 2 from the series ?

 

and they were quite good.

 

so, as you stated, it has nothing to do with the quality of the show.  and that is very much in our favor.

 

there is no doubt in my mind that the first 3 years would be just as popular as the other ones.  it is a very good show.

Jimmy, no one is going to the expense or trouble of cleaning up, remastering and digitizing PD episodes. All the "dollar bin" companies would have to do would be to grab the new transfers themselves and sell them as well.


  • Randy Korstick, Steve...O, Gary OS and 2 others like this

Find me on Facebook

 

My blog

 

Jethro, how come there's no ice in Californy? ~ Uncle Jed

 

Don't look at me, I didn't take it! ~ Jethro


#50 of 98 jimmyjet

jimmyjet

    Screenwriter

  • 1,915 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2009

Posted September 03 2014 - 08:47 PM

hi ron,

 

i am not convinced that one can simply take a blu-ray and copy from it directly.

 

i am working on getting an answer.

 

but in either case, mrfd does not necessarily apply with your logic.

 

lets take case 1, such that there is a way to make "my" blu-ray version have copyright protection.  then it is a no-brainer.

 

so lets take case 2, and assume your statement is absolutely correct - someone could take "my" blu-ray that I put all sorts of work into, and simply copy it with a burner.

 

in the case of mrfd, we are talking 11 seasons, only 3 of them without copyright

 

so i have a package with all 11 seasons on blu-ray.  i also have my own personal stuff on it, that you have no ability to use on your version.

 

how many people do you think would purchase your set of 3 seasons without all the other doo-dads, when they could purchase the whole kit and caboodle from me ?

 

you might take some revenue from me, but not enough that i would worry about it.

 

now if the whole 11 seasons applies to your statement, that might be a much more difficult situation.

 

if case 2 is correct at this point, it also would not surprise me if that law was changed to protect that level of transfer.

 

thanks for the discussion



#51 of 98 jimmyjet

jimmyjet

    Screenwriter

  • 1,915 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2009

Posted September 03 2014 - 08:55 PM

the whole intent of "copyright" is to help the public.

 

if there is no protection for work being done, then no one will do the work, if it can simply be taken.

 

and the public is done a disservice.

 

if we protect someone's work, then said someone is encouraged to do the work, thereby creating a product that is desired by at least some of the public.

 

i have been told that it takes a lot of time and effort to transfer 35mm film to blu-ray.

 

we should protect that work.



#52 of 98 jimmyjet

jimmyjet

    Screenwriter

  • 1,915 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2009

Posted September 03 2014 - 09:18 PM

hi ron,

 

take a look at this thread

 

http://forum.blu-ray...t=161511&page=2

 

3 pages in all

 

but they are talking about quite a few pd films that were released on blu-ray

 

is there something particular about these films ?

 

because if the info is accurate, irregardless of the law, IT IS ALREADY BEING DONE (transferring pd to blu).

 

we are talking about an individual movie, which is the whole kit and caboodle.

 

i am guessing that these releases have some copyright protection on them.

 

hopefully others can add some of their expertise to this discussion.

 

research shows that colorizing qualifies for protection.

 

not sure yet about hd transfers.  but i am guessing that here is some way around this.

 

too many blus have been made from pd movies



#53 of 98 jimmyjet

jimmyjet

    Screenwriter

  • 1,915 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2009

Posted September 03 2014 - 10:55 PM

when i get to the bottom of something, i get to the bottom of something

 

from my research, too much pd is being transferred that it leads me to think that there are at least instances where the transfer has been protected.

 

while personal anecdotes are interesting, if someone wants to submit something as proof, either

 

1) submit case law, section, etc. that refers to hd transfers

 

2) or better yet, submit an actual case regarding an hd transfer, so that we can see what the interpretation of the law was.

 

if it was allowed to be copyrighted, why ?

 

if it was not allowed to be copyrighted, why not ?

 

 



#54 of 98 jetskier

jetskier

    Extra

  • 21 posts
  • Join Date: May 18 2007

Posted September 04 2014 - 01:40 AM

You know, regardless of any other considerations, it's really a shame that Seasons 1 through 3 of Make Room for Daddy are being treated as if they never existed, because of this:

 

At the 1954 Emmy Awards, the show won "Best New Series."

 

At the 1955 Emmy Awards, it won "Best Situation Comedy," beating The George Burns and Gracie Allen Show, Mr. Peepers, Our Miss Brooks, Private Secretary, and this little thing called I Love Lucy.

 

That year, Thomas won Best Actor in a series, and that included dramas as well as comedies.  (And Jean Hagen was nominated, but in the "Supporting Actress" category.)

 

The next year, it was nominated in all these categories -- and Hagen was nominated this time as Best Actress AND as Supporting Actress.  If anyone can figure that out, let me know.

 

Anyway, my point is, these seasons which are hidden from view forever for mysterious and probably petty reasons were very highly regarded in their day.  If they're that good, you'd think the family would want them to be seen.

 

This series, all eleven years of it, is surely Danny Thomas's legacy.  It was one of the most successful and awarded sitcoms in the so-called "golden age" of television.  But we have to pretend 3/11 of it never existed, I guess.

 

 

That's interesting - thanks for the research.

 

Another thing that's quite sad and extremely selfish of the Thomas family for holding back the first 3 seasons (no matter what the reason) is that they are severely undermining the contribution of the kids!  Especially in Seasons 1 - 3, the kids were the youngest, therefore, probably the funniest, if the writers knew from the get-go how funny kids can be and how to write for them.  So, how far up their asses are the Thomas family's heads to think it was mainly about the 2 different Moms....or what Danny thought about one of them off-stage, which has absolutely nothing to do with the enjoyment for the viewers of what's happening on-stage.

 

Sure, I'll agree that Lord definitely added some enjoyment of watching the Mom character, not only for her "cute reactions" and all-around more animated acting style, but for her looks too.  However, that pales in comparison to the kid's comedic lines (and sometimes Danny's reaction) that the writers were smart enough to give them.

 

If you want proof of that, the next time you watch a MRFD episode, fast-forward through the scenes with the kids and see how much you laugh (or) even enjoy the show in general.  I bet you find it quite boring!  If you don't, then you're not watching it for the comedy; instead, you're into Danny's singing (or) the few guest stars they had (or) the drama of the moral lesson that Danny sometimes (? quite often ?) beats you over the head with, which, 2 out of these 3 are terribly boring to me.

 

So, ENOUGH about the Moms - release the first 3 seasons so the public can enjoy the KIDS !  As it stands now, we're missing three full seasons of "funny, young kid's stuff".

 

 

P.S.:  O.k., maybe some of the Uncle Tonoose scenes are somewhat funny without hearing what the kids say, but ironically, I can distinctly remember as a kid watching, I didn't like the Uncle Tonoose character, probably because being a kid, I couldn't understand his broken english and his jokes were over my head.

I can enjoy him a little more now, BUT, the kids..... :rolling-smiley: :laugh:  :rolling-smiley:


  • cwilli likes this

#55 of 98 Rob_Ray

Rob_Ray

    Screenwriter

  • 1,437 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 12 2004
  • Real Name:Rob Ray
  • LocationSouthern California

Posted September 04 2014 - 05:08 AM

At this late date, I'd be happy if more vintage 16mm prints turned up so that a resourceful public domain company could release a more definitive collection of seasons 1-3 in some sort of semi-deluxe PD box set.  The one advantage of these seasons being in the public domain is that it doesn't matter what is or isn't in Mr. Thomas' will or what the Thomas estate wants to do.

 

I say this because I completely agree with Jimmy that kids were often the best thing about the show.  I'd go so far as to nominate Rusty Hamer as the best child actor of his era.  I tend to find most child actors generally insufferable but Rusty and, later on, Angela Cartwright, were just adorable on this show.  Rusty, in particular, had an impeccable delivery and the first three seasons contain some of his best work, judging by the few episodes I've seen.  A standout for me in the recently aired and long-suppressed season four was his duet of "Sonny Boy" with Barry Gordon.  This comic "ask-the-questions-that-the-next-lyric-line-will-answer" arrangement of the Jolson standard was old by 1956, but his timing with all the lines like "How old am I?" was priceless.  I'm still laughing as I type this.  "What's my name?"



#56 of 98 JoeDoakes

JoeDoakes

    Screenwriter

  • 1,908 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 01 2009
  • Real Name:Ray

Posted September 04 2014 - 06:39 AM

the whole intent of "copyright" is to help the public.

 

if there is no protection for work being done, then no one will do the work, if it can simply be taken.

 

and the public is done a disservice.

 

if we protect someone's work, then said someone is encouraged to do the work, thereby creating a product that is desired by at least some of the public.

 

i have been told that it takes a lot of time and effort to transfer 35mm film to blu-ray.

 

we should protect that work.

You're right.  Film is a medium that really takes effort to preserve and make available in a quality presentation.  There should be protection for those who preserve and restore public domain film material (theatrical and television).  Unfortunately, there is not enough money in it for Hollywood to put lobbying resources behind such an effort, and it is very hard to get anything done in Washington unless there is an active lobbying effort.


  • Ron1973 likes this

#57 of 98 jimmyjet

jimmyjet

    Screenwriter

  • 1,915 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2009

Posted September 04 2014 - 07:11 AM

hi joe,

 

i am not at all sure that there is not already avenues of protection.

 

until i get some real definitive evidence, i am not buying into the argument that someone can just take an hd transfer done by someone else, and simply copy it and sell it.

 

in anything important in life, i dont buy, unless real evidence is given.

 

if there is no protection, as some think, then show me some real legal proof of that.



#58 of 98 jimmyjet

jimmyjet

    Screenwriter

  • 1,915 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2009

Posted September 04 2014 - 07:16 AM

i have asked this question on a legal site.

 

someone there said that hd transfers was protected.

 

but i have asked him the same question.

 

show me some legal proof of this.

 

i am interested only in the truth.

 

not willing to simply believe what i want to believe or think things should be.

 

i want to know just how the law is currently interpreting hd transfers.



#59 of 98 Randy Korstick

Randy Korstick

    Screenwriter

  • 2,394 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 2000

Posted September 04 2014 - 07:40 AM

Where did it say anywhere that MRFD was getting HD transfers or a Blu-Ray release. This is BOD/MOD release which most likely means season by season release on DVD-R's since all other BOD/MOD releases are done this way. If they follow the WA model they may do an initial run of Pressed discs. This release is coming from SFM and not the Thomas estate. It was already mentioned at the beginning of the thread that season 1-3 are not being provided to them.

Good quality Public domain films are taken all the time by other companies because they are in public domain anyone can release it. A really nice version of the Abbott and Costello film: Africa Screams was done for Laserdisc by a private party in the late 80's . The film was in PD and only available in bad copies prior to that version. That version is still being used for DVD's today and has been released by about a dozen companies. The private party that spent all the time and money restoring the film did not receive a penny for any of these other releases.


  • Professor Echo and Ron1973 like this
...When you eliminate the impossible whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth

Top 20 Films

#60 of 98 jimmyjet

jimmyjet

    Screenwriter

  • 1,915 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2009

Posted September 04 2014 - 07:47 AM

hi randy,

 

thanks for your post.

 

can you supply us with any sort of legal case that supports the argument that a restored hd film (that was from public domain) can literally be copied ?

 

surely some company who put in this work, would find the interest to challenge this in court, so that some ruling was given at some point in time ?

 

otherwise, how would anyone know that his work could not be protected ?






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users