This article just appeared in the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/mo...html?th&emc=th
The article mentions the other suits against New Line as well--the second lawsuit filed by Zaentz last December which still must be tried and the one by 16 New Zeeland actors that will come to trial in December 2008.
One attorney feels that part of the problem in all this litigation is the fact that New Line computes its profits differently than other studios:
Quote:
What they’re accounting for is different than the majors, because the majors are worldwide distributors,” said David Colden, an entertainment lawyer with the Beverly Hills firm Colden, McKuin & Frankel, which is not involved in any of the litigation. New Line’s international division works through foreign distributors that are not part of the company, while major studios are equipped to distribute directly abroad. The way New Line calculated payments based on its revenue from its foreign distributors of “Rings” was a major issue in the first Zaentz suit, filed in 2004.
|
Also, any litigation will be tremendously complicated because there are so many contractual agreements to consider: (1) the literary-rights agreement made in 1969 with United Artists (2) the agreement made in 1976 which sold the rights to Zaentz (3) the agreement of 1997 that licensed them to Miramax, AND, (4) the final agreement in 1998 that licensed them to New Line