›

Who owns James Bond?

2»

Comments

  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    Sir_James_Moloney wrote:
    Have found a definitive answer: The Broccolis bought UA's shares in 1986.
    I guess UA thought it might be all over with the retirement of the great Rog. :P
    Thanks for shedding such light on the corporate machinations surrounding the ownership of Bond, Sir James!

  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    Sir_James_Moloney wrote:
    Aziz_Fekkesh wrote:
    Can the Broccoli's extend the copyright?

    No they can't @Aziz_Fekkesh as copyright terms are dictated by law. So once the copyright term expires, the novels (and, later, the films) move into the public domain. But I think it's highly likely that both the European Union and the USA will be persuaded to extend the length of the statutory copyright term - as many, many large corporations are pressuring them to do so (and, in fairness, they have a number of reasonable arguments to back up their agenda)

    No doubt this is a problem, or soon will be, for the Sherlock Holmes novels.
  • Sir_James_MoloneySir_James_Moloney
    edited April 2013 Posts: 388
    Thanks @timmer!
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Sir_James_Moloney wrote:
    Aziz_Fekkesh wrote:
    Can the Broccoli's extend the copyright?

    No they can't @Aziz_Fekkesh as copyright terms are dictated by law. So once the copyright term expires, the novels (and, later, the films) move into the public domain. But I think it's highly likely that both the European Union and the USA will be persuaded to extend the length of the statutory copyright term - as many, many large corporations are pressuring them to do so (and, in fairness, they have a number of reasonable arguments to back up their agenda)

    No doubt this is a problem, or soon will be, for the Sherlock Holmes novels.

    It is, @Samuel.

    The copyrights for all of the Sherlock Holmes stories have been in the public domain in the UK for about 10 years or so and the character himself for about 25 years. All are in the public domain in the US too apart from a few stories from The Casebook of Sherlock Holmes.

    Arthur Conan Doyle's Estate have tried to claim that the character of Sherlock Holmes is therefore still under copyright in the US because the character wasn't "completed" until Conan Doyle finished his last story, ergo the character can't be in the public domain until all stories are in the public domain. A very well known Sherlockian has recently taken the ACD Estate to court to finally have their claims officially shot down.
  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    Sir_James_Moloney wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Sir_James_Moloney wrote:
    Aziz_Fekkesh wrote:
    Can the Broccoli's extend the copyright?

    No they can't @Aziz_Fekkesh as copyright terms are dictated by law. So once the copyright term expires, the novels (and, later, the films) move into the public domain. But I think it's highly likely that both the European Union and the USA will be persuaded to extend the length of the statutory copyright term - as many, many large corporations are pressuring them to do so (and, in fairness, they have a number of reasonable arguments to back up their agenda)

    No doubt this is a problem, or soon will be, for the Sherlock Holmes novels.

    It is, @Samuel.

    The copyrights for all of the Sherlock Holmes stories have been in the public domain in the UK for about 10 years or so and the character himself for about 25 years. All are in the public domain in the US too apart from a few stories from The Casebook of Sherlock Holmes.

    Arthur Conan Doyle's Estate have tried to claim that the character of Sherlock Holmes is therefore still under copyright in the US because the character wasn't "completed" until Conan Doyle finished his last story, ergo the character can't be in the public domain until all stories are in the public domain. A very well known Sherlockian has recently taken the ACD Estate to court to finally have their claims officially shot down.

    This is why all the Sherlock Holmes stories are available in public depositories (e.g. Gutenberg) for anyone who wants to read them, which is great particularly for e-readers.
  • MaxRebo120MaxRebo120
    Posts: 136
    I do. I own the rights to Bond.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Well according to this. We all do. :D
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Sandy wrote:
    Sir_James_Moloney wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Sir_James_Moloney wrote:
    Aziz_Fekkesh wrote:
    Can the Broccoli's extend the copyright?

    No they can't @Aziz_Fekkesh as copyright terms are dictated by law. So once the copyright term expires, the novels (and, later, the films) move into the public domain. But I think it's highly likely that both the European Union and the USA will be persuaded to extend the length of the statutory copyright term - as many, many large corporations are pressuring them to do so (and, in fairness, they have a number of reasonable arguments to back up their agenda)

    No doubt this is a problem, or soon will be, for the Sherlock Holmes novels.

    It is, @Samuel.

    The copyrights for all of the Sherlock Holmes stories have been in the public domain in the UK for about 10 years or so and the character himself for about 25 years. All are in the public domain in the US too apart from a few stories from The Casebook of Sherlock Holmes.

    Arthur Conan Doyle's Estate have tried to claim that the character of Sherlock Holmes is therefore still under copyright in the US because the character wasn't "completed" until Conan Doyle finished his last story, ergo the character can't be in the public domain until all stories are in the public domain. A very well known Sherlockian has recently taken the ACD Estate to court to finally have their claims officially shot down.

    This is why all the Sherlock Holmes stories are available in public depositories (e.g. Gutenberg) for anyone who wants to read them, which is great particularly for e-readers.

    I listen to the Baker Street Babes podcast and they recently had an interview with the man who was taking the ACD Estate to court. Their argument against the estate is if the first appearance of Holmes and the majority of the characters (A Study in Scarlet and the early stories) are in public domain, then it means anyone should be able to write Holmes stories free of copyright infringement.
  • Aziz_FekkeshAziz_Fekkesh Royale-les-Eaux
    Posts: 403
    I think that story about Saltzman wanting to dissolve Eon is interesting; it would perhaps explain their falling out during the production of TMWTGG.
  • Sir_James_MoloneySir_James_Moloney
    Posts: 388
    A great find from @Suivez_ce_parachute in the Bond 24 Timeline thread: http://www.getfilings.com/o0001193125-04-027353.html This report from 2003 specifically mentions MGM's rights in the James Bond films.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,480
    But that is all very interesting! Thanks for sharing, SirJames.
    I am glad Broccoli was able to continue. Did Saltzman get out of it in good terms and reasonably good feelings with all? I don't recall if the split was the ruining of their friendship. Sorry if this was already discussed somewhere. I'm just curious and don't remember ...
  • Sir_James_MoloneySir_James_Moloney
    Posts: 388
    4EverBonded wrote:
    But that is all very interesting! Thanks for sharing, SirJames.
    I am glad Broccoli was able to continue. Did Saltzman get out of it in good terms and reasonably good feelings with all? I don't recall if the split was the ruining of their friendship. Sorry if this was already discussed somewhere. I'm just curious and don't remember ...

    Thanks @Germanlady although I can't take the credit for the last post. That was down to @Suivez_ce_parachute's investigative work.

    The story with Saltzman is quite sad. He made a lot of money from the Bond films but, unlike Broccoli, he wanted to work on lots of different projects and invested his money badly. He had to sell his shares in Danjaq (and many of his personal possessions) just to keep the wolf from the door.

    The relationship between Saltzman and Broccoli had been in a bad way for a long time as they were very different personalities. As early as 1965 (on the production of YOLT) they were publicly describing it as "very strained." By the 70s, they were pretty much taking turns at producing the films alone (Broccoli produced DAF and TMWTGG, Saltzman produced LALD.) Saltzman actually sued Broccoli in the Swiss courts to try to get him to honour their (alleged) agreement to dissolve Danjaq in 1972.

    But Broccoli always spoke very respectfully of Saltzman and he invited him as a special guest to the FYEO premier in 1981 so it seems that they did manage to repair their relationship to some degree.
  • Suivez_ce_parachuteSuivez_ce_parachute
    edited June 2013 Posts: 2,015
    More findings (or lack of, rather)

    On the Getfilings URLs, one can find MGM reports mentioning Danjaq in 2003 and 2004

    Between 2004 and now, well I googled a bit things like :

    metro goldwyn mayer form 10-k "2007 annual report"

    but alas with all the casinos it's a mess to find something relevant (even using the -resorts tag to remove "resorts" does not help much)

    and trying to google

    danjaq metro goldwyn mayer form 10-k

    still gives nothing apart from 2003 and 2004

    And I'm clueless with US law, but this could be the reason why nothing is to be found after 2004 :

    [url="
    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/778706/999999999705023057/9999999997-05-023057-index.htm"]
    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/778706/999999999705023057/9999999997-05-023057-index.htm[/url]
  • Sir_James_MoloneySir_James_Moloney
    edited June 2013 Posts: 388
    I think the last filing from Metro-Godwyn-Mayer was in 2005, @Suivez, as that's when the company was dissolved as your link shows. For more recent ones look for "MGM Holdings II" - the company that now owns the studio - again, it's tough going as there aren't many reports (I think because of the bankruptcy) but the most recent reports from 2012 and 2013 are available on the MGM website. Here's the 2012 one: http://www.metrogoldwynmayer.com/dynamic/pdfs/report_pdfs/report_pdfQ1.pdf
  • timmertimmer
    Posts: 4,622
    Sir_James_Moloney wrote:
    By the 70s, they were pretty much taking turns at producing the films alone (Broccoli produced DAF and TMWTGG, Saltzman produced LALD.)
    This is interesting. I can see the similarities. All three films have the Hamilton/Mankiewicz camp touch, but the two Broccoli films (DAF and TMWTGG) are a tad darker. I knew there must be a reason, I've always liked Golden Gun's vibe. It was that little extra Cubby touch.

  • Suivez_ce_parachuteSuivez_ce_parachute
    Posts: 2,015
    Reading an old URL given elsewhere here :
    [url="
    http://www.deadline.com/2011/01/bond-is-back-daniel-craig-and-sam-mendes-set-for-nov-9-2012-release-date/"]
    http://www.deadline.com/2011/01/bond-is-back-daniel-craig-and-sam-mendes-set-for-nov-9-2012-release-date/[/url]

    "As you know, the James Bond filmmakers operate with great autonomy and watching the MGM situation unfold with a mixture of dismay and curiosity. Dismay because Bond’s longtime studio home was a mess. And curiosity because Broccoli and Wilson hoped to move Bond to a fully functioning studio. Like Sony, where Amy Pascal was dying to keep the famous franchise. Or Fox, which handled Bond’s DVD distribution. Broccoli and Wilson very deliberately made certain they didn’t do anything on Bond #23 which tied the movie further to MGM. (That’s why Mendes was hired as a consulting, not the director. Because once EON hires a director on their Bond films, it triggers a first payment from MGM.) Once the MGM auction apparently busted, EON Productions wanted to keep all its options open."
  • petergreenhill5petergreenhill5
    edited August 2013 Posts: 824
    From the 2003 10-K Annual Report for MGM
    We, together with Danjaq LLC, are the sole owners of all of the James Bond motion pictures. In addition to the recently released James Bond picture, Die Another Day, 19 other James Bond motion pictures in our library were produced and are distributed pursuant to a series of agreements with Danjaq. The James Bond motion pictures are produced by Danjaq, and we have the right to approve all key elements of the pictures, such as the selection of the director and the leading actors. The copyright in each of the motion pictures is owned jointly by MGM and Danjaq. Historically, we have the right to distribute each of the pictures in all media worldwide in perpetuity or for a term of 15 years. Where our distribution rights are not perpetual, the rights revert to joint control by MGM and Danjaq after expiration of the distribution term. On January 21, 2004, we entered into an extension agreement with Danjaq. Under that agreement, our distribution term for each of the non-perpetual James Bond motion pictures was extended by 15 years from the previously scheduled expiration date, and the initial distribution term for new James Bond pictures, beginning with Die Another Day, was extended from 15 years to 20 years. Danjaq controls certain merchandising rights with respect to the pictures, and we are entitled to receive a portion of the revenues from Danjaq’s merchandising licenses. Additionally, we control all the marketing rights and the music from The Living Daylights (1987) and all subsequent pictures. All other rights relating to the pictures are controlled jointly by MGM and Danjaq. The agreements contain certain restrictions on the sale or licensing by MGM of any of our rights in the pictures.
    If the Broccoli family owns 100% of Danjaq then according to the above Danjaq doesn't hold all of the rights to the Bond films. If the films are owned jointly then surely MGM owns half the rights and Danjaq the other half or am I missing something. If UA sold the rights they bought from Saltzman in the mid 70s on to Broccoli in the mid 80s, where did MGM acquire it's rights to the Bond films?.

    Any clarification, much appreciated. Thanks




  • petergreenhill5petergreenhill5
    Posts: 824
    According to this 2010 article Danjac is 50% owned by MGM. Saltzman sold his 50% share to UA in 1975. UA taken over by MGM and so owns the Danjac stake. Says nothing about Cubby Broccoli buying back the Danjac stake in 1986 or any other time.

    http://www.tjbd.co.uk/content/the-bond-23-delay-why-eon-is-tied-to-mgm.htm
  • petergreenhill5petergreenhill5
    Posts: 824
    This LA Times article explains where Sony fits in. They co- finance with MGM, Bonds 23 and 24 and distribute in US and other major markets but MGM retain distribution rights in some parts of the world. MGM retain DVD and TV rights.

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/04/sony-and-mgm-finalize-bond-co-financing-partnership.html
  • Sir_James_MoloneySir_James_Moloney
    edited August 2013 Posts: 388
    PeterGreenhill wrote:
    According to this 2010 article Danjac is 50% owned by MGM. Saltzman sold his 50% share to UA in 1975. UA taken over by MGM and so owns the Danjac stake. Says nothing about Cubby Broccoli buying back the Danjac stake in 1986 or any other time.

    http://www.tjbd.co.uk/content/the-bond-23-delay-why-eon-is-tied-to-mgm.htm

    Broccoli bought MGM / UA's 50% stake in Danjaq in 1986. This is detailed further up the thread and documented in legal records in the case against Sony and Kevin McClory.

    A lot of Bond websites and books still list MGM as co-owner of Danjaq and, as far as I know, this thread was the first resource to definitively confirm that Broccoli took complete control of the company in 1986. I updated the Wikipedia entry, including references, some months back so I would expect the correct information to be communicated in the future.
    PeterGreenhill wrote:
    If the Broccoli family owns 100% of Danjaq then according to the above Danjaq doesn't hold all of the rights to the Bond films. If the films are owned jointly then surely MGM owns half the rights and Danjaq the other half or am I missing something.

    That's right. MGM has an exclusive distribution deal in place with Danjaq and also co-owns the copyright to all existing Bond films. MGM is also understood to have certain favourable rights relating to merchandise etc. This all came into play in 1986 when Broccoli purchased MGM's stake in Danjaq - a favourable rights-share was the trade-off.

    But when the existing agreement expires, Danjaq will be free to find another studio or distributor to work with for future films. Danjaq are the sole holders of the film rights to James Bond (i.e. when the distribution deal expires, MGM has no right to make further James Bond films - Danjaq does.)
  • 007InVT007InVT Classified
    Posts: 893
    MGM, Danjaq Settle James Bond Rights Dispute With McClory Estate!

    "Danjaq, LLC, the producer of the James Bond films, and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM), the longtime distributor of the Bond films, along with the estate and family of the late Kevin McClory, announced today that Danjaq and MGM have acquired all of the estate’s and family’s rights and interests relating to James Bond, thus bringing to an amicable conclusion the legal and business disputes that have arisen periodically for over 50 years."

    http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/11/16/mgm-danjaq-settle-james-bond-rights-dispute-with-mcclory-estate
  • ColdfingerColdfinger
    Posts: 317
    007InVT wrote:
    MGM, Danjaq Settle James Bond Rights Dispute With McClory Estate!

    "Danjaq, LLC, the producer of the James Bond films, and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM), the longtime distributor of the Bond films, along with the estate and family of the late Kevin McClory, announced today that Danjaq and MGM have acquired all of the estate’s and family’s rights and interests relating to James Bond, thus bringing to an amicable conclusion the legal and business disputes that have arisen periodically for over 50 years."

    http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/11/16/mgm-danjaq-settle-james-bond-rights-dispute-with-mcclory-estate

    Great news, I guess we can end this thread now. :-p
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    Thank goodness this is now all over! Dragged on WAY too long for me! @-)
Sign In or Register to comment.