(Meta) Some background information

[stormwreath]

Some of you may already have seen a big interview that Scott Allie of Dark Horse Comics gave to Ain't It Cool News recently... but if you haven't, he gave the clearest statement I've ever seen about the copyright and licencing situation regarding 'Buffy' and Joss's other creative works. I thought it might be interesting to repeat it here:

SCOTT:

Comments

[tessarin]

I thought the licensing stuff was common knowledge. Joss owns nothing so if/when Fox decide they want to revisit the property they will have no problem invalidating all or part of the canon.It's the same situation as Roddenbury.

I do wonder whether the quietness on the film front means there is some behind the scenes maneveuring going on.

[stormwreath]

I've seen enough contradictory information being passed around that I think I'm safe in saying that no, it's not common knowledge. :-)

From my own perspective, I know that Fox owns the copyright so they have ultimate control, but I've seen enough people in official positions - including Fran Kazui and Gail Berman - saying that "we need to run this by Joss first" that I wondered if he had some terms in his contract with Fox giving him right of refusal or some such. But it appears he doesn't, it's just professional courtesy. (Under EU copyright law, the artist's "moral rights" over their creation - such as the right to object to derogatory treatment of it - are separate to the actual copyright, but I don't know if US law follows that principle.)

I do wonder whether the quietness on the film front means there is some behind the scenes maneveuring going on.Maybe the almost universal outrage, not only among fandom but from the industry professionals involved with the original 'Buffy' series, made the Kazuis realise that so much bad

[owenthurman]

Gail Berman implies in interviews that there is some kind of contract that required her to offer a producer job to Joss for any work her created that went to the screen. She didn't really expect him to want to run Buffy, but had to ask (lucky thing, too).

But it could just be professional courtesy of the kind that isn't written down but would ruin your credibility if you violated it.

random commenter

[rowanda380]

thanks for highlighting that info, very interesting!

Re: random commenter

[stormwreath]

:-)

[erimthar]

That was a very enlightening interview.

I had known that Joss owned none of his shows (except Dr. Horrible) and that Fox could cut him off if they wanted... but they're smart enough to know that the vast majority of fans wouldn't recognize as legitimate anything they did without him. Fox has the legal rights, but only Joss carries the Key to the Canon.

As both the season 8 and Angel: AtF comics have shown, his name on a Buffyverse project increases sales by a factor of 2-3, so Fox will want to keep him nice and happy.

I hadn't realized that Firefly and Serenity were two different licenses owned by two different companies, though. Seems odd, because although Dark Horse's license is for Serenity (the movie), they have used characters specifically from the series in their comics... Dobson and the Blue Hands come immediately to mind. Wonder how that works.

[stormwreath]

As I understand it, Fox cancelled 'Firefly' and weren't interested in any sort of continuation of it. Joss was looking for some way to keep going, and rang a friend who had a movie deal with Universal. That friend mentioned it to a Universal executive (Mary Parent) who sat down and watched 'Firefly', decided it was good, and agreed to make the film - so Universal bought the movie rights from Fox

[stormwreath]

That's interesting... I know I've seen an interview with Gail Berman where she said she had to approach Joss first when she decided to finance the 'Buffy' TV show, and give him right of first refusal to direct it. (She actually expected him to turn it down, and was pleasantly surprised when he said he'd do it.)

It's certainly possible that he has a confidential clause in his contract with Fox giving him creative control, and that Scott Allie isn't actually aware of that...

[eowyn_315]

I know I've seen an interview with Gail Berman where she said she had to approach Joss first when she decided to finance the 'Buffy' TV show, and give him right of first refusal to direct it.

Yes, I remembered that, too. Presumably, that would be the case for all future Buffy projects, so Allie is only half-right about the legalities.

I think the distinction is that Fox can do a Buffy project without Joss' approval, but Joss can't do a Buffy project without Fox's approval. Joss can choose whether to be involved, but he can't stop Fox from doing something he doesn't want. But Fox doesn't want to piss Joss off, so they're probably not going to pursue a project if Joss doesn't ok it.

What Allie's trying to say, I think, is that Joss couldn't go to Dark Horse and say, "I want to do Buffy comics," unless Dark Horse had a license from Fox to publish them. He needs Fox's permission to do anything with Buffy.

[mr_waterproof]

So basically Rupert Murdoch owns Buffy.

[stormwreath]

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

/Anakin Skywalker

[mr_waterproof]

Actually, Star Wars is 20th Century Fox, so Murdoch owns him too.

[stormwreath]

Well obviously Darth Vader is owned by Rupert Mu-- no wait, I'm thinking of Emperor Palpatine. It's an easy mistake.