Film Rights to First & Second Age - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Sauron the White · 12-18-2007, 10:15 PM

Nerwen ... I will try as you request.
My point is that it is not clear what rights are owned by the Tolkien Estate and what rights are owned by Zaentz and New LIne when it comes to material outsideofthe actual HOBBIT and LOTR stories.

Why? Because JRRT included a wealth of historical information in his Appendicies which were part of LOTR - ROTK and sold as film rights in 1969. Eight years later, the book length SILMARALLION is published and now there are two accounts of these events.

Many people here, including Mr. Hicklin, speak as if they have a Supreme Court decision in front of them clearly spelling out in great detail what can be done and what cannot be done with these film rights. This is not the case in reality. There is much grey area .

Since it was announced today that other material will be used in the upcoming two films outside of the normal LOTR and HOBBIT stories, I thought it would be a good idea to explore the entire idea and approach it from something other than the convention wisdom.

My point has nothing to do with CT causing to be published the SIL. Nothing. I think that was terrific. But it certainly makes the film rights to the Silmarallion material in LOTR a much more murky situation which I think is glossed over by folks like Mr. Hicklin who appear to think their viewpoint is Holy Writ or came down from the mountain top led by a choir of angels.

I refer you to my opening post in this thread.

Aiwendil · 12-18-2007, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Many people here, including Mr. Hicklin, speak as if they have a Supreme Court decision in front of them clearly spelling out in great detail what can be done and what cannot be done with these film rights. This is not the case in reality. There is much grey area .

Surely it's this simple: the film rights include material in the LotR appendices but exclude material in other publications. Explicit use of material that is in the Silmarillion and not in the appendices would be illegal. You don't need a Supreme Court decision to tell you that any more than you need one to tell you that, yes, pointing a gun at someone and shooting it is illegal (even if the gun is licensed).

There is a potential grey area relating to the appendices: it's conceivable that if a movie were made there might be material in it about which it's not clear whether the '77 Silm. or HoMe was or was not a source. But the ambiguity in such a case could only lie in whether the film used ideas from works other than TH and LotR, not whether the use of such intellectual property is legal.

Nerwen · 12-18-2007, 11:30 PM

STW, thanks for explaining your position. What I still don't understand is why you think CT's act of publishing The Silmarillion affects the rights to material in The Lord of the Rings.

I don't see how this can be the case.

Are you suggesting that lawyers for Tolkien Estate might claim anything which is treated in both The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion violates the copyright on the latter? I don't think they'd get very far.

12-18-2007, 10:15 PM	#1
Sauron the White Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 903	Nerwen ... I will try as you request. My point is that it is not clear what rights are owned by the Tolkien Estate and what rights are owned by Zaentz and New LIne when it comes to material outsideofthe actual HOBBIT and LOTR stories. Why? Because JRRT included a wealth of historical information in his Appendicies which were part of LOTR - ROTK and sold as film rights in 1969. Eight years later, the book length SILMARALLION is published and now there are two accounts of these events. Many people here, including Mr. Hicklin, speak as if they have a Supreme Court decision in front of them clearly spelling out in great detail what can be done and what cannot be done with these film rights. This is not the case in reality. There is much grey area . Since it was announced today that other material will be used in the upcoming two films outside of the normal LOTR and HOBBIT stories, I thought it would be a good idea to explore the entire idea and approach it from something other than the convention wisdom. My point has nothing to do with CT causing to be published the SIL. Nothing. I think that was terrific. But it certainly makes the film rights to the Silmarallion material in LOTR a much more murky situation which I think is glossed over by folks like Mr. Hicklin who appear to think their viewpoint is Holy Writ or came down from the mountain top led by a choir of angels. I refer you to my opening post in this thread.

12-18-2007, 11:30 PM	#3
Nerwen Wisest of the Noldor Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: ˙˙˙ssɐןƃ ƃuıʞooן ǝɥʇ ɥƃnoɹɥʇ Posts: 6,694	STW, thanks for explaining your position. What I still don't understand is why you think CT's act of publishing The Silmarillion affects the rights to material in The Lord of the Rings. I don't see how this can be the case. Are you suggesting that lawyers for Tolkien Estate might claim anything which is treated in both The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion violates the copyright on the latter? I don't think they'd get very far.