Harlan Ellison COTEF Lawsuit Gains Momentum

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

The Guardian, however, is a bit of a problem. Harlan Ellison’s unused drafts included The Guardians of Forever, three ancient beings who controlled time. The finished episode, heavily rewritten by writers other than Ellison, has The Guardian (singular) of Forever, a mysterious, donut shaped time portal. It is an extrapolation of the original three beings, but NOT the three beings. Harlan introduced a concept which evolved by others into something else in the final episode. And THIS is the concept you see marketed and written about.

See Art Buchwald versus Paramount, regarding "Coming to America," where a vague 'treatment' was considered so vital to the end product he won millions.

Moreover, Harlan Ellison's own second draft, which had McCoy bit by a "rabid" animal rather than accidentally injected, featured the singular, donut time portal Guardian. So it's still his creation.

Pieces of the second draft are in the White Wolf edition of the original script.

 

[JoeD80]

You want a story by an actual author or establish screen-writer, rather than the usual television fare cranked out by a committee of staff writers?

Everyone knows television writers aren't actual authors .

 

[chardman]

You want a story by an actual author or establish screen-writer, rather than the usual television fare cranked out by a committee of staff writers?

Everyone knows television writers aren't actual authors .

When I say "actual authors and screen writers", I mean "Name" authors and screenwriters. People with established credentials and followings outside of the television industry. As opposed to staff writers, who wrote primarily "by committee", "by formula", and were virtually unknown outside the industry (often deservedly so).

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

OMG I can't believe I am still reading about Mr. Ellison and his Bitch that Goes on Forever.

They better put a mention of this on his gravestone. I can see people leaving Playmates Edith Keeler toys at his grave. Maybe setting them up in the dirt..

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Bottom line: Tie-in merchandise making use of characters and concepts created by writers using the MBA would become more expensive to produce, but the writers would now be getting some compensation for their works continuing to make money for the studios, instead of not getting anything even while the studios profit off of their work. How this would affect the content of tie-ins is unknown.

The Doctor Who novels are indicative.

Copyright works differently in the UK than it does in the US. The creators of races and characters in the series retain ownership. Thus, a novelist can't use the Daleks, unless there's permission from Terry Nation's estate and a percentage of the author's payment goes to the estate.

Which means that, in all practical purposes, it's easier for the novelist to create something new than it is to work with something old.

What we would probably see, if Ellison wins his lawsuit, is a lot of the past put away. I can see this having both positive and negative effects. In the negative column, some of the original-to-novels series which rely heavily on minor series characters would go away. In the positive column, because the novels would, financially, have to divorce themselves from certain creations, the novels would probably become less mired in continuity and the perception that they are difficult to jump into would lessen.

 

[JoeD80]

You want a story by an actual author or establish screen-writer, rather than the usual television fare cranked out by a committee of staff writers?

Everyone knows television writers aren't actual authors .

When I say "actual authors and screen writers", I mean "Name" authors and screenwriters. People with established credentials and followings outside of the television industry.

Why does a television writer not count as a "name" author? You have to be outside of the industry to be established? I think most people knew who Roddenberry was, or who Chris Carter and Joss Whedon are, and David Shore and Bruno Heller are names that should be known now. Personally, I'd rather work with writers that I know can actually write for television than someone who has a couple of novels under their belt.

 

[Photoman15]

You know who really gets the shaft in TV production? Artists.

You write a script, you get paid for that every time the show is aired, sold on DVD, etc. You design a starship while you're working for a show...the studio owns it.

*applauds*

Absolutely! I could get onboard a movement to get royalties for artists!

I think all these things (the writers, artists) should be covered in a "work-for-hire" contract. The writer/artist got paid and the rights are purchased by that payment by whoever (Paramount in this case). If you think the payment is not sufficient, don't sign the work-for-hire contract and don't accept the job.

 

[Captrek]

You know who really gets the shaft in TV production? Artists.

You write a script, you get paid for that every time the show is aired, sold on DVD, etc. You design a starship while you're working for a show...the studio owns it.

*applauds*

Absolutely! I could get onboard a movement to get royalties for artists!

I think all these things (the writers, artists) should be covered in a "work-for-hire" contract. The writer/artist got paid and the rights are purchased by that payment by whoever (Paramount in this case). If you think the payment is not sufficient, don't sign the work-for-hire contract and don't accept the job.

As I previously pointed out, it’s not at all unusual for very important figures in businesses in other industries to be compensated based on the future success of what they’re working on. Why should writers be excluded from that form of compensation when it is common in other industries?

Besides, have you ever heard of competition and the free market? If Paramount is unwilling to offer future residuals to top writers, you better believe Warner Bros. will, and then Paramount will be on the outside looking in.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I think all these things (the writers, artists) should be covered in a "work-for-hire" contract. The writer/artist got paid and the rights are purchased by that payment by whoever (Paramount in this case). If you think the payment is not sufficient, don't sign the work-for-hire contract and don't accept the job.

I think that I appreciate the fact that your theories don't have anything to do with the way the world works. What's just is for the artists to be better treated, not taking away rights from other creative folk.

I'm still compensated whenever the shows I worked on are rerun, sold on DVD, etc. I very much appreciate that and the guilds and unions who work on our behalf.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

Amen, Mr. Bailey. Amen.

 

[Maurice]

The Guardian, however, is a bit of a problem. Harlan Ellison’s unused drafts included The Guardians of Forever, three ancient beings who controlled time. The finished episode, heavily rewritten by writers other than Ellison, has The Guardian (singular) of Forever, a mysterious, donut shaped time portal. It is an extrapolation of the original three beings, but NOT the three beings. Harlan introduced a concept which evolved by others into something else in the final episode. And THIS is the concept you see marketed and written about.

That's an inaccurate characterization of what occurred. Only one of the Guardians speaks in the first draft, and his "character" is given to the singular not humanoid Guardian of Forever in Ellison's 2nd draft, which visually represented as the time donut in the aired episode. The character and its name remains the same. The Donut is casting, not creation.

Moreover, Harlan Ellison's own second draft, which had McCoy bit by a "rabid" animal rather than accidentally injected, featured the singular, donut time portal Guardian. So it's still his creation.

I just looked and Ellison doesn't describe the donut in the 2nd draft. He gave vague indications of what it might look like, as follows:

"The GUARDIAN OF FOREVER is pure thought. Resting in a shallow bowl on a pedestal, he looks like a globe of flickering light...like a shimmering handful of fog . . . like something totally alien and omnipresent. (Construction of the Guardian should combine a minimum of expense with a maximum of ingenuity.)

Again, Ellison created the character of the Guardian, and no matter what face or non-face the producers chose to apply to it, it's remains his creation. The people who cast Spock and designed his look aren't the ones who created him, after all. This has to be so or any producer who wishes to make more bucks would change characters so that they could claim ownership. If you don't protect this, it just invites producers to take unfair advantage.

 

[pookha]

I wonder if Ellison should try to claim Yesterday’s Enterprise. The timeline gets changed, resulting in the good guys losing a war, people dying in numbers too vast for the human mind to really grasp, and possibly the end of freedom and democracy, and a terrible sacrifice must be made to restore history. It owes almost as much to Ellison’s teleplay as does the version of TCOTEOF that ultimately aired. Which is to say, a basic story concept and not a whole lot else.

except harlan didnt create that type of time travel story.
alternative history is one of the oldest branches of sf.

 

[Captrek]

I wonder if Ellison should try to claim Yesterday’s Enterprise. The timeline gets changed, resulting in the good guys losing a war, people dying in numbers too vast for the human mind to really grasp, and possibly the end of freedom and democracy, and a terrible sacrifice must be made to restore history. It owes almost as much to Ellison’s teleplay as does the version of TCOTEOF that ultimately aired. Which is to say, a basic story concept and not a whole lot else.

except harlan didnt create that type of time travel story.

I was being sarcastic.

 

[Photoman15]

I think all these things (the writers, artists) should be covered in a "work-for-hire" contract. The writer/artist got paid and the rights are purchased by that payment by whoever (Paramount in this case). If you think the payment is not sufficient, don't sign the work-for-hire contract and don't accept the job.

I think that I appreciate the fact that your theories don't have anything to do with the way the world works. What's just is for the artists to be better treated, not taking away rights from other creative folk.

I'm still compensated whenever the shows I worked on are rerun, sold on DVD, etc. I very much appreciate that and the guilds and unions who work on our behalf.

I admit I don't know the inner workings of television/movie writers and their contracts, but it is how the photography world works.

 

[Sci]

You know who really gets the shaft in TV production? Artists.

You write a script, you get paid for that every time the show is aired, sold on DVD, etc. You design a starship while you're working for a show...the studio owns it.

*applauds*

Absolutely! I could get onboard a movement to get royalties for artists!

I think all these things (the writers, artists) should be covered in a "work-for-hire" contract. The writer/artist got paid and the rights are purchased by that payment by whoever (Paramount in this case). If you think the payment is not sufficient, don't sign the work-for-hire contract and don't accept the job.

Um, they are. You are confusing the issue of royalties -- which simply obligates payment to the writer -- with the issue of the rights -- which refers to legal ownership.

I assure you, CBS owns the rights to "The City on the Edge of Forever." CBS also pays a royalty check to Ellison every time that episode is broadcast or purchased.

For the record, any writer of a show that's covered by the WGA receives such royalties, staffer or freelancer. I'm not sure if, under Ellison's contention, staffers would also be entitled to royalty checks stemming from the use of their characters/concepts in media tie-in merchandise, though.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I'm not sure if, under Ellison's contention, staffers would also be entitled to royalty checks stemming from the use of their characters/concepts in media tie-in merchandise, though.

That would be nice.

Writers are entitled to payment for reuse of characters they create in later episodes of a TV series.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Moreover, Harlan Ellison's own second draft, which had McCoy bit by a "rabid" animal rather than accidentally injected, featured the singular, donut time portal Guardian. So it's still his creation.

I just looked and Ellison doesn't describe the donut in the 2nd draft. He gave vague indications of what it might look like, as follows:

Thanks for the clarification. My signed copy is in a storage room, and I didn't have it handy to double-check.

Nevertheless, the description you posted, albeit vague in description, is clearly the character (The Guardian of Forever) that appeared in the episode, fog included. And thus still an Ellison creation despite whatever was designed for the stage. Casting, as you put it.

 

[Maurice]

Speaking of Ellison, did anyone else see the documentary about him that was on Sundance recently: "Dreams With Sharp Teeth"?

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Speaking of Ellison, did anyone else see the documentary about him that was on Sundance recently: "Dreams With Sharp Teeth"?

I've known about it for awhile and have been waiting for it to come out on DVD. Then I heard about it airing on Sundance via John Scalzi's website. I hope they show it again.

 

[Maurice]

^^^It was pretty good. It opens with him answering True or False about the many stories told about him over the years, read by Robin Williams.