Doctor Who
- Dalek ownership decided
- David Tennant to appear on Derren Brown's Trick or Treat
- Doctor Who 'not Welsh enough'?
- The Ood know something we don't know? [spoiler]
Film
- Ridley Scott to direct Casey Affleck in period noir The Kind One
- X-Files sequel will try something new
- Hulk smash puny Marvel!
British TV
- Mitchell and Webb making new sitcom for BBC2
- Ieuan Wyn Jones asks Beeb to make more programmes in Wales
- Richard and Judy ditching Channel 4 and heading to UKTV
US TV
- NBC picks up Rosario Dawson's web series Gemini Division
- Lucky Louie star writing sitcom for CBS
April 17, 2008 | Reply
Does this affect who owns the rights to the Daleks when it comes to appearances on Television? I was under the impression that Nation's estate still controlled that, which is why they didn't show up more often in the new series.
Personally, I hope that's true. I'd hate to think they would keep popping up on the series with no end in sight. I guess I came into the series too late to be affected by the sight of them and never really got into them as villains.
And the way they've been presented on the new series, it's been a series of diminishing return appearances. They had power and were effective in Eccleston's season, but it's fallen off since then. And it dishonors the sacrifice of Gallifrey that they're still around.
Oh well. At least those who always dreamed of Daleks vs. Cybermen finally got their wish.....
April 17, 2008 | Reply
The case related to literary copyright - the claimant company having been involved in the publication of Terry Nation's Dalek books, and claiming that the copyright had passed to them. Now this does not seem to be about copyright on use of the Daleks (there were other BBC books that used the Daleks) but instead on the content of Nation's Dalek books, which is referred to in the Dalek Survival Guide. These original Dalek books contain Dalek backstory (not Dals or Kaleds or Davros but Yarvelling as creator of the Daleks). The company argued that Nation had transferred copyright in this outright to them, but had no written assignment and the Beeb argued that the company only had a licence to publish that book.
I've not yet read the judgment http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2008/757.rtf in full and there may be subtleties - but that seems to be the foundation of the case and so should not impact on the use of the Daleks in the TV serial (even if RTD brings back the creator of the Daleks, Yarvelling obviously, in episodes 11, 12, or 13 this series).
April 17, 2008 | Reply
What he said.
April 17, 2008 | Reply
Para 36 of the judgment shows the judge has a sense of hunour. he describes "The Chase" charitably as "memorably bad".
April 17, 2008 | Reply
Are you saying he was joking when he described The Chase as memorably bad? Hmm, I'll just see if I can find my copy in this nearby DARDIS to check... ;-)
April 17, 2008 | Reply
I like para 25:
"I do not consider that towards the end of a four-hour lunch in a Camden brasserie Mr Hancock would have been inclined to grapple with the degree of detail necessary for an agreement sufficiently certain to be legally binding"
April 17, 2008 | Reply
"Could you pass the wine, please?"
"First European serial rights? Why, Roger! That's so kind of you!"
"Pardon?"
"You'd like to give me the copyright, too? That's beyond generous."
Still, you've got to love Roger Hancock. "Can you say 'Dal'? Can you see 'Lek'? Then you've infringed my client's intellectual property rights. That'll be £5,000, please."