Ellison is sueing Paramount over Crucible and other merchandise

[BryanSorensen]

I think what Chris said above is right on...it is really odd that he waited until JUST prior to the movie release to come up with this. I think its all just hype..i mean if he was due something like he said he is..he woulda had it coming a while ago.

 

[Paris]

It's interesting that he's lashing out against the WGA since he's one of their top members, if memory serves.

Correct me if i'm wrong but, I think he's only asking for $1 from the WGA. It seems he just wants them to admit that they made a mistake when handling this whole thing and apologize to him. His real beef is with CBS I believe....

 

[QuasarVM]

Apart from all else I have said on this topic, I have to ask -- "Why now?".

Star Trek has been a robust merchandising venture as far back as the 70's.

And truly, I can't even recall much -- if any-- merchandise based on City On The Edge of Forever.

The Playmates figures come to mind...an occasional trading card...other than that, I am at a loss.

 

[Brendan Moody]

I think what Chris said above is right on...it is really odd that he waited until JUST prior to the movie release to come up with this.

Except that, as Starship Polaris mentions, he didn't. He's been threatening legal action about this since he became aware of Crucible in late 2006.

I think its all just hype..i mean if he was due something like he said he is..he woulda had it coming a while ago.

His claim would appear to be that he did have it coming a while ago. He just hasn't chosen to pursue compensation through legal action until now. Maybe he thinks recent releases give him a better case; maybe Crucible just felt like the last straw.

 

[Misfit Toy]

Apart from all else I have said on this topic, I have to ask -- "Why now?".

Star Trek has been a robust merchandising venture as far back as the 70's.

And truly, I can't even recall much -- if any-- merchandise based on City On The Edge of Forever.

The Playmates figures come to mind...an occasional trading card...other than that, I am at a loss.

Well, there's the Hallmark ornament that is mentioned in the complaint, as well as the usage in Crucible. I remember that the Guardian was used in Imzadi, but I *think* Peter David asked Ellison's permission for that...

 

[BryanSorensen]

found it

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

My one-word reaction -- again? -- RR

Not again. Same process that's been working it's way along for quite some time.

I think what Chris said above is right on...it is really odd that he waited until JUST prior to the movie release to come up with this.

Except that, as Starship Polaris mentions, he didn't. He's been threatening legal action about this since he became aware of Crucible in late 2006.

More than that, he's been pursuing a remedy through the union during that time, not randomly threatening.

Man, anybody doesn't tug their forelock to TPTB at the studio really stirs up the ant hill, don't they?

 

[CaptJimboJones]

I think what Chris said above is right on...it is really odd that he waited until JUST prior to the movie release to come up with this. I think its all just hype..i mean if he was due something like he said he is..he woulda had it coming a while ago.

To be fair to Ellison, we don't know what's been going on behind closed doors in this case. Often lawsuits are only filed after many months of informal negotiation fail to produce a settlement. It's possible that he and Paramount have been wrangling over this for a long time.

 

[Therin of Andor]

And truly, I can't even recall much -- if any-- merchandise based on City On The Edge of Forever.
The Playmates figures come to mind...an occasional trading card...other than that, I am at a loss.

Hallmark talking ornament of the Guardian. Long before that, the Franklin Mint diorama, which was heavily promoted in magazines and at trade fairs. Enamelled badges of the Guardian w/ episode title. Edith images in the calendars...

Supposedly, DC Fontana ("Yesteryear" TAS episode, w/ Alan Dean Foster novelizing), AC Crispin ("Yesterday's Son"/"A Time for Yesterday"), Barbara Hambly ("Ishmael") and Peter David ("Imzadi") all magically knew to approach Ellison for his "kind permission" to use the Guardian in a ST novel. ???

 

[SeerSGB]

Dick or not-- and 50% of the time I err towards "Ellision is a overblown egotistical asshole-- if they owe the man, they owe the man. Just because it's Star Trek doesn't mean he should take it up the ass.

And given Ellision's track-record, the man probably is got a good case. He doesn't go into these things unless he thinks or knows he can win. Say what you will, he's not a idiot.

I do wonder what it means for things like syndication, novel/comic reprints, and DVD sets. Not to mention this being one more reason for the studios to wipe the slate clean and start fresh with TOS.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Supposedly, DC Fontana ("Yesteryear" TAS episode, w/ Alan Dean Foster novelizing), AC Crispin ("Yesterday's Son"/"A Time for Yesterday"), Barbara Hambly ("Ishmael") and Peter David ("Imzadi") all magically knew to approach Ellison for his "kind permission" to use the Guardian in a ST novel. ???

Some of them kind of know him, and they're writers - respect might well have crossed their minds.

 

[CaptJimboJones]

Dick or not-- and 50% of the time I err towards "Ellision is a overblown egotistical asshole-- if they owe the man, they owe the man. Just because it's Star Trek doesn't mean he should take it up the ass.

Agreed. While I wonder sometimes if Ellison is mentally ill (I came to that conclusion after reading his "City on the Edge of Forever" book, which is one of the more bizarre rants put to page that I've come across) I give him an enormous amount of credit for his lifelong insistence that writers should be paid for their work. Yes, he can be a total prick about it, but he has a valid point that all too often in the entertainment industry, writers are expected to give their work away for free.

If he has a contractual agreement that guarantees him compensation for use of characters and plot elements he created, then more power to him.

 

[ronny]

Since I know nothing about tv and book contracts, intellectual property rights, etc I'll just not give an opinion on that part of it. Odd, I know, since we are on the internets...

I just hope DRG doesn't have to spend any time giving depositions and doing other legal work. I woudln't think so but I don't know how these things work and I want him writing damn it!!!

 

[Csalem]

I assume the cancellation of the Crucible reprint really was down to Marco's sacking and had nothing to do with this?

 

[captcalhoun]

^yes.

 

[Rat Boy]

Check out comments #222 and #225 at Trekmovie from David Gerrold. Might make you think about the message differently since it's coming from a different messenger.

 

[Christopher]

Yes, he can be a total prick about it, but he has a valid point that all too often in the entertainment industry, writers are expected to give their work away for free.

No, we're expected to sign our work away for money. And if that's what the contract specifies, then we know it going in and have the option to decline.

Check out comments #222 and #225 at Trekmovie from David Gerrold. Might make you think about the message differently since it's coming from a different messenger.

Gerrold's first post clarifies the issue somewhat. Going by him, this isn't about asserting ownership or creative control, isn't saying that people need Ellison's permission to adapt his concepts, which would be bizarre. Rather, it seems to be that he's not getting the compensation he's entitled to for derivative works, which is a different matter. Generally authors do get royalties for the reuse of their characters onscreen. This is why VGR had Tom Paris instead of Nick LoCarno and why ENT had T'Pol instead of T'Pau -- to avoid paying weekly royalties to the creators of those characters. Apparently the idea here is that such royalties should apply with regard to books, comics, and other merchandise as well, and should be enforced more consistently across the board. That's a much more plausible argument.

The question, though, is: if the lawsuit were successful and studios had to pay more for the reuse of authors' concepts, would that have a negative impact on the tie-in industry, which is dependent on such reuse? Or would it reduce the share of royalties that the author of a tie-in gets for the book? Hopefully not. I'm all for writers getting their fair share, of course, but I wouldn't want some writers (including myself) to be penalized for the sake of other writers (also possibly including myself, if I sell more original fiction in the future).

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Yeah, you could have gotten that by reading the original announcement and the actual complaint which have been linked to here.

No, we're expected to sign our work away for money. And if that's what the contract specifies, then we know it going in and have the option to decline.

That and if rendered the rest of your assertion moot.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

The question, though, is: if the lawsuit were successful and studios had to pay more for the reuse of authors' concepts, would that have a negative impact on the tie-in industry, which is dependent on such reuse?

I don't see that as an issue with Doctor Who, where this is how it works. Copyright works differently in the UK, and the BBC doesn't own everything associated with Doctor Who. So the Who novels have had to create new things and not endlessly recycle old things. So, if Ellison prevails and a Who-like atmosphere descends upon Star Trek fiction, it will survive. Who is doing just fine.

Or would it reduce the share of royalties that the author of a tie-in gets for the book? Hopefully not.

Again, I can point to the relevent example of Doctor Who, where, for instance, the Terry Nation estate has received a cut of the author's advance for novels involving the Daleks. (Hence, the reason why Saward didn't novelize his two Daleks stories, while John Peel was willing to take less money for his original Dalek novels.)

 

[Rat Boy]

The question, though, is: if the lawsuit were successful and studios had to pay more for the reuse of authors' concepts, would that have a negative impact on the tie-in industry, which is dependent on such reuse? Or would it reduce the share of royalties that the author of a tie-in gets for the book? Hopefully not. I'm all for writers getting their fair share, of course, but I wouldn't want some writers (including myself) to be penalized for the sake of other writers (also possibly including myself, if I sell more original fiction in the future).

New Frontier would be dead in the water, since it relies heavily on characters established on the show (Selar, Shelby, and Lefler). As for Titan, outside of Riker, Troi, and Tuvok, you'd only be able to use characters from the novels, so Melora and Nurse Ogawa are out the window.