OK, quotes ensue:
Quote:
Is it not possible, that a sharp legal staff with some innovative thinking, could well claim that they own the films rights to that material and anything published later and made known to the public can be used by them as well since it only details material which they already owned and had use of?
|
Quote:
is it not possible for a legal department to advocate that since the legally own that information in the Appendicies for the purposes of film, that they have the right to other more detailed information that JRRT had also written up until that time and referred to by name or character or event in LOTR?
|
Quote:
I would remind you that the word Silmarallion was used by JRRT in the Appendicies to LOTR where he described many events of the First and Second Ages. That material from LOTR is owned as film rights by Saul Zaentz and New Line Cinema.
|
Quote:
Could not a case be made that it was Christopher Tolkien who - in your words - "used some sneaky way" of attempting to take back what his father had already sold?
|
Now, how have I misinterpreted your argument?
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it.
|