Readers of Harlan Ellison’s webpage–and even some non-readers–are aware that Harlan is launching a legal action against Pocket Books over current and upcoming novels about Edith Keeler.
Quite a few folks have been asking me if this will have any impact on “Imzadi” which, as anyone who has read it knows, is basically an inversion of “City” and features the Guardian of Forever. Although I already suspected the answer, I called Harlan and he personally assured me that “Imzadi” will not be a part of the litigation, for two reasons: First, he’d never cause a close friend that kind of grief, and second, way back in the day when I first came up with the plot, I called him and asked permission. He gave me the okay, I wrote the book, and dedicated it to him.
In terms of the case itself, I know all the parties involved and–for all I know–I might be called for deposition because of “Imzadi.” Plus, y’know…not a lawyer. So I’m not commenting beyond saying that I certainly hope matters are settled quickly and to the satisfaction of all concerned.
PAD
• 
I too hope they are settled quickly
I can’t actually find where Harlan talks about it on his website (is his website actually http://www.harlanellison.com?). Can any helpful poster put up a link? My first reaction was “Isn’t his work for Paramount work-for-hire…?”…but there must be more to the story, and I’m no legal mind, and I’d like to see his own words first.
Ah ha. I just actually noted PAD did not actually say Harlan was talking about it on his website, just that readers of his website probably are aware of it. Distinction taken.
Amen to that.
I’m sorry, Peter, because I know he’s your friend, but this is just pure douche-baggery.
Bully, I think this might pointyou in the right direction:
http://harlanellison.com/heboard/unca.htm?beg=145&num=25
Hope that works. You’ll have to scroll down to the header’The Next Big Battle’ but at least you’ll get the primary source rather than a secondhand version. I should have mentioned it when I chimed in about this on another thread (apologies, Peter), but I think I was simply responding to something somebody else said at the time.
I have a sneaking suspicion this is gonna cause Strange New Worlds no end of grief…SNW submissions are restricted to canon (So, among other things, no NF stories) partly because of the copyright issues of non-canon characters…but there have been a fairly good amount of prizewinning submissions (including at least two grand prize winners) that utilize the events of “City”. It would be a shame if we couldn’t use the events of “City” in stories, either…
In terms of SNW, just because they (We? Currently working on a DS9 story meself) wouldn’t be able to use anything from City doesn’t mean that there isn’t some OTHER time travel technique to be used, if it works for the story. Writers have been finding ways around obstacles in stories for a very long time. Half of my fun in writing something comes from putting my people in pickles and then trying to get them OUT.
That’s just nonsense
Ellison has no legal claim whatsoever to the CotEoF script as it aired on television. All he owns is the original script.
And the Crucible books are only based on the final episode
It all comes down to the contract that Harlan Ellison signed way back when. It’s hard to imagine they gave him one that allowed him to keep control of the characters and events created for story…but then again, to get a famous writer’s story they may well have done things that were not typical. So who knows?
The only significance of PAD’s situation would be that A-He got permission, which bolsters Mr. Ellison’s case and B-If Pocket Books was unaware of this it would bolster THEIR case. They could argue that Ellison did not protect his supposed coyright in any real sense of the word.
The whole thing might have been avoided if they’d had the smarts and common decency to give him a big credit on the cover. It might have eevn boosted sales.
Something like this has come up before and it went against the author. Jerome Bixby created the STAR TREK Mirror universe in a 1967 episode. When DEEP SPACE NINE revived the Mirror universe on an episode 25 years later, he tried to get royalties but his claim was turned down because Paramount owned all rights to what he’d created.
They could argue that Ellison did not protect his supposed coyright in any real sense of the word.
I would imagine that, if Ellison actually has a case, then this will be one of Pocket’s biggest defenses, because this trilogy is only the latest to use stuff from that episode of TOS, and Ellison has apparently never thrown a šhìŧ fit before over it.
Yeah, and when the final DS9 mirror story aired, Bixby died something like two weeks later. That’s not really precedent we want to follow.
TWL
abc, I’m curious: have you actually seen the agreement Harlan Ellison signed with Paramount? If so, it’s awfully irresponsible of you to be commenting on pending litigation. If not, then how do you know what rights Ellison does or does not retain with respect to “The City on the Edge of Forever?”
Steve, regarding your allegations of “douche-baggery,” remember that we live in a capitalist system. Ellison created something of value, so much so that Paramount is still profiting from it to this day. Ellison believes he is legally entitled to: a.) control what is done with that which he created, and b.) receive compensation for its use. He is pursuing his claim through the courts, which is the appropriate venue. That doesn’t sound very “douche-baggy” to me.
It’s standard practise in the american television industry.
The authors don’t own anything they are writing for TV shows.
If Ellison wanted any creative control over it, he should have written an original book
Don’t you think Pocket Books would have been aware of the situation and negogiated something if he had any real claim?
And yeah, it’s douche-baggery that he’s throwing a fit over it now, but not over any previous uses of the Guardian of Forever. “Imzadi” isn’t the only other case
“I’m sorry, Peter, because I know he’s your friend, but this is just pure douche-baggery.”
I appreciate your concern over my feelngs. Now…do you have any concern with actually knowing what you’re talking about? I mean, if you’re a Paramount lawyer, or a WGA lawyer, or a Pocket Books staffer, or someone who has some sort of first person knowledge of the agreements involved, then I would very much like to know the details of your information. If, on the other hand, you’re just spouting off, okay, but your opinion is based on absolutely nothing and THAT might actually be worth apologizing for.
PAD
// That’s just nonsense
Ellison has no legal claim whatsoever to the CotEoF script as it aired on television. All he owns is the original script.
And the Crucible books are only based on the final episode //
Ellison and Paramount/Pocket (or thier respective lawyers) obviously disagree on this point. Which way the law falls is of course yet to be determined.
What I find curious is why this is only coming up now, Edith Keebler and the Gardian have appeared in other Trek licensed material, aside from PAD’s own Trek work there are a few other Trek novels where they appear, (Yesterday’s Son and it’s sequal come to mind), the guardian also appeared in one of the animated shows, (one of the watchable episodes of the animated shows), and made a few appearances in the comics back when DC had the lisence. There’s also been toys, models and X-Mas tree ornimates of the gardian.
I doubt these escaped HE’s notice. (Espcially since there was a picture of him standing next to the model in a TV guide a decade of so back). Did he approve and get paid for those uses and not this one? If he didn’t get paid, give permission, or complain about those uses, you can be sure that Paramount and Pocket Books legal teams will use that fact against him.
James Van Hise mentions Jerome Bixby and the Mirror Universe. In that situation, Bixby’s loss had more to do with the way the WGA factored royalties–the Mirror Universe was a concept, not a character, and thus not something he could claim royalties for. On the flipside, Ted Sturgeon’s estate would have received royalties for T’Pau had she been a regular character on Star Trek: Enterprise (as had been planned), which led the producers to simply rename the character T’Pol. Same character, different name, no royalty payments.
I can, however, think of a situation that’s a bit more applicable–Norman Spinrad’s complaints over Wildstorm’s Planet Killer miniseries, which pit the Voyager against the Doomsday Machine. Spinrad was quoted at the time as saying he felt this was a theft of his intellectual creation, but there was nothing he could do as he had no ownership of the Doomsday Machine and Paramount did.
If Ellison’s contract with Norway Productions and Desilu were different than Spinrad’s contract for “The Doomsday Machine,” then Ellison may have a case. But why would Ellison have had a different contract?
Whatever happens, it will be interesting.
abc, you are in essence using the “everyone just knows” argument, which is, in fact, a very poor argument, because “everyone” doesn’t “just know.” There are always exceptions.
Again, unless you’ve seen the contracts involved, and know enough about the legalese to properly interpret them, then you really don’t know what you’re talking about.
I have this odd notion that the courts will hammer it out, and that you and I won’t have an influence on those proceedings. But that’s just me.
Copyright and Trademark are two completely different things. If you don’t fight every abuse of trademark, you can lose your trademark. Which is why if you buy a copy of Writers Digest (or other similar magazines) you will see several ads in each issue from companies (such as Kimberly Clark) reminding writers to use a trademark symbol after their product names (such as Kleenex).
However, this is not the case with copyright. You can pick and choose your battles. Harlan not suing over a copyright violation in one instance, can sue over a copyright violation in another instance. It shouldn’t have any effect on his chances in court. Which is one reason most authors will ignore fan fiction. It’s just as much a violation of copyright as commercial use, but they know they will be able to fight future abuses when it really matters.
PAD has stated in the past, I believe, that one reason we will never see Captain Calhoun on the small or large screen is because Paramount is unlikely to desire paying him for the rights. So from this I deduce it’s not unheard of for creators to retain the rights for the use of characters.
Beyond this, I know nothing about the facts of the case.
James Van Hise mentions Jerome Bixby and the Mirror Universe. In that situation, Bixby’s loss had more to do with the way the WGA factored royalties–the Mirror Universe was a concept, not a character, and thus not something he could claim royalties for.
I can, however, think of a situation that’s a bit more applicable–Norman Spinrad’s complaints over Wildstorm’s Planet Killer miniseries, which pit the Voyager against the Doomsday Machine.
But why would Ellison have had a different contract?
I know nothing about the contracts, but, does this make sense:
Mirror Universe: Concept
Doomsday Machine: Concept
Edith Keeler: Character
It makes sense to me. But I know nothing about the contracts. I’m taking the above poster’s word for it that some contracts have specified a difference between characters and concepts.
…Edith Keebler…
No, it’s Spock who had the pointy ears. And I’m pretty sure there were no cookies in COTEOF.
Reasonable questions all, none of which I’ve discussed with Harlan for the obvious reason that he can’t talk about it. If I had to take a guess–and that’s all it is–perhaps it has to do with the notion that images of the Guardian (such as toys and models) aren’t covered by any agreements because they don’t involve creative use of the characters or creations in “City.” They’re just licensed images. You also don’t know *when* agreements were made, or what they contained. What if–for instance–Harlan had an agreement with Paramount that basically said the rights of the original characters reverted to him after–say–twenty years? Or thirty years? Wouldn’t that explain why something was not actionable at one point, but actionable later on?
It’s not unprecedented. Consider the case of Peggy Lee. Of all the people who wrote or sang songs for Disney, only Peggy Lee was crafty enough to put together a deal in the 1950s that got her big bucks for her “Lady and the Tramp” contribution decades later. Her contract was written so that she argued–successfully–that Disney didn’t have the right to use her songs in the home video market release, even though that market didn’t exist back in the 1950s.
Anything is possible, is all I’m saying.
PAD
// way back in the day when I first came up with the plot, I called him and asked permission. He gave me the okay, I wrote the book, and dedicated it to him. //
This brings up a question about working on material you didn’t create and don’t own, that I’m curious how you feel about. Obviously you called Harlan way back, have you ever done that any other times with any other creators? I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume you don’t do this for every story you write with a character or concept that was created by someone else. (I may be wrong but I doubt you called Stan and/or Jack everytime you wrote an issue of the Hulk for instance). So the question is where do you draw the line? Why get Harlen’s OK and not Stan’s?
This isn’t picking on you, it’s something that was on my mind from watching the Batman Animated series on DVD recently. On the Legends of the Dark Knight episode comentary it was mentioned that they got Frank Miller’s write off to adapt his style on the Dark Knight sequence, but Bruce Timm also made it clear in his comentary that they didn’t get a sign off from Ðìçk Spang, (whose art style was also homaged in that episode). This made me go, “why’d they feel they had to get Miller’s OK, but not Sprang’s?”.
I know you can’t answer for them and don’t expect you to. The point is that it didn’t seem to be the first time I heard a creator go, “well I wanted to do this with character A but I made sure it was ok with Creator A first”.
It seems like a lot of creative folk have a line and feel they need to run some things by the original creator, but never seem to feel they have to do that with everything they work on that they didn’t create. So obviously there’s a line there, and it may be different for different creators, I’m just wondering where yours is?
And conversly how would you feel if it went the other way. If another writer used concepts or characters from a New Frontier novel would you be bothered?
Thanks
// It’s not unprecedented. Consider the case of Peggy Lee. Of all the people who wrote or sang songs for Disney, only Peggy Lee was crafty enough to put together a deal in the 1950s that got her big bucks for her “Lady and the Tramp” contribution decades later. Her contract was written so that she argued–successfully–that Disney didn’t have the right to use her songs in the home video market release, even though that market didn’t exist back in the 1950s //
You’re right, Peggy Lee isn’t the only one with forsight. Orson Welles had the forsight to protect Citizen Kane from being colorized, (he actually put in his contract “cannot change the black and white” photography of the film”), decades befor the technoligy to colorize a film existed.
On the other side of the coin Brian Epstien had the Beatles sign a contract where they lost thier publishing and movie rights after 10 years because, (according to sources), no one had ever heard of a pop group still being popular after 10 years.
Here’s Ellison’s take:
Assuming he’s portraying things accurately, then he’s got a case. Personally, I’d be surprised if any production company had agreed to leave characters in a show the property of the writer instead of the studio, but I have no experience in the legal or writing profession to back that up.
Tell you what, I’ll apologize for the “Douche-bag” crack if it turns out that Ellison has the slightest legal leg to stand on.
The guy who created the Nike “Swish” got less than a thousand dollars for it. The McDonalds brothers sold to Ray Kroc for a comparatively modest fee. Did they deserve more? As cold as it may seem,– No, they did not. They knew what they were getting into when created and/or sold their properties to another. *THAT’s* capitalism as well. Now, I admit to having only a layman’s knowledge of such things, but it seems to me that legal precedent is WAY against him.
So if this actually turns out to be more than another frivolous law-suit clogging up the courts by someone trying to claim something that they have zero legal right to, I’ll apologize here and publically.
If it turns out that HE’s just spouting off, then my opinion of the man stands. An opinion I’ve held ever since he published his original script, btw.
Frankly, Peter, as a tie-in writer yourself I would think that the possible precednt this would set would be a frightening one. How could this possibly not have a Richard Arnold-level negative effect on the Trek fiction line?
// The guy who created the Nike “Swish” got less than a thousand dollars for it. The McDonalds brothers sold to Ray Kroc for a comparatively modest fee. Did they deserve more? As cold as it may seem,– No, they did not. They knew what they were getting into when created and/or sold their properties to another. *THAT’s* capitalism as well. Now, I admit to having only a layman’s knowledge of such things, but it seems to me that legal precedent is WAY against him. //
It has nothing to do with precident and everything to do with contracts. THe people you mentioned signed bad contracts, why do you assume Ellision also signed one.
Back in the golden age of comics everything was work for hire and the creators never owned anything, yet somehow Will Eisner was able to retain ownership and control of the Spirt. The point, there are always exections.
It’s reasonable to assume that most of the writers on the original Trek had standard contracts, and thus wouldn’t be able sue, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that HE had one.
As has been stated, Orson Welles was able to keep his films from being colorized, where John Houston wasn’t, why? Welles had a different (better) contract. Peggy Lee got DVD and video royalties from Disney, when others who worked on Disney films of that era didn’t, why? Better contract. Those exampes are as much as a precident as the ones you mentioned, these things work both ways.
^ I imagine that, if Ellison gets his way, each tie-in covers will be a covered in television writers’ names like logos on a NASCAR vehicle, as every single author of every single element referenced in the novel would have to be cited and credited.
I read the original post, and found myself irritated beyond any reasonable measure that the guy who brought it to Ellison’s attention mentioned he never read tie-in novels, as a rule. I have to wonder whether, if he did, he’d be as eager to report such slights to other authors, because there are a whole heck of a lot of them. Sadly, I recently mailed my new copy of the “Vulcan’s Glory” reprint home, so I can’t check, but I don’t believe I spotted the words “Theodore Sturgeon” anywhere in it. Nor, I believe, were any of the writers of the many (and I do mean many) other episodes directly referenced, partially novelized, or otherwise synthesized into “Crucible” credited.
Though, I find it rather disturbing that Ellison refers to himself as a “working writer” when he’s trying to piggyback on someone else’s 1800 page Star Trek opus on the basis of something he essentially disowned. It is, after all, based on the mutilated, aired version of “City.”
// Copyright and Trademark are two completely different things. If you don’t fight every abuse of trademark, you can lose your trademark. Which is why if you buy a copy of Writers Digest (or other similar magazines) you will see several ads in each issue from companies (such as Kimberly Clark) reminding writers to use a trademark symbol after their product names (such as Kleenex).
However, this is not the case with copyright. You can pick and choose your battles. Harlan not suing over a copyright violation in one instance, can sue over a copyright violation in another instance. It shouldn’t have any effect on his chances in court. Which is one reason most authors will ignore fan fiction. It’s just as much a violation of copyright as commercial use, but they know they will be able to fight future abuses when it really matters. //
I don’t pretend to know about these things, but I was under the understanding that a copyright could be argued to have been “abandoned”. Or is that just trademarks?
Though, I find it rather disturbing that Ellison refers to himself as a “working writer” when he’s trying to piggyback on someone else’s 1800 page Star Trek opus
If you ever write a novel/screenply, and someone takes your ideas and uses them for another work, and doesn’t get your permission, do you promise not to care?
If Ellison managed to sign a contract where he retained the rights…that’s what copyright is for. He’s not being a jerk, he’s getting what he is deserved.
And it sets no precedents…except as a warning to authors and studios about watching what they sign.
I don’t pretend to know about these things, but I was under the understanding that a copyright could be argued to have been “abandoned”. Or is that just trademarks?
That’s just trademarks. I’m not a lawyer, but I’m an aspiring author, and have researched these issues, and am 99.9% certain.
Trademarks can last forever if they aren’t abandoned. But the protections are more limited.
Copyright protections are more extensive, but they have a limited duration, and don’t disappear until the duration has elapsed.
The only comparable thing to ‘abandonment’ I have seen with copyrights is a strange argument I’ve heard has been successful recently: that you made a good faith effort to contact the copyright holder, and were unable to locate them. I think HE is relatively easy to find, and Pocket Books wouldn’t be able to make that argument if the contract works against them.
“douche-baggery” – The worst idea for and upscale boutique EVER!
JAC
Posted by Darren J Hudak at September 7, 2006 08:41 PM
// way back in the day when I first came up with the plot, I called him and asked permission. He gave me the okay, I wrote the book, and dedicated it to him. //
This brings up a question about working on material you didn’t create and don’t own, that I’m curious how you feel about. Obviously you called Harlan way back, have you ever done that any other times with any other creators? I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume you don’t do this for every story you write with a character or concept that was created by someone else. (I may be wrong but I doubt you called Stan and/or Jack everytime you wrote an issue of the Hulk for instance). So the question is where do you draw the line? Why get Harlen’s OK and not Stan’s?//
Possibly because Stan Lee was an employee of Marvel Comics and Jack Kirby was an artist-for-hire when they co-created The Hulk! Also, neither one of them had obtained any copywrites, by contract or purchase, to any of their works.
Anyone who’s had as many scrapes with the law as Harlan’s had could conceivably possess the legal savvy to obtain a clause that would limit ownership of a script after X number of years, especially from a TV show that was cancelled two years after even a popular show was broadcast.
Also, the original script was published in book form not once but TWICE, the first time with permission from Paramount! Who can say that this ISN’T part of Harlan’s Claim of Ownership?
No doubt this will be set the most dramatic legal precedent since Harlan and his friend Ben Bova won their case against ABC for their “Brillo Plagarized to make Future Cop” case nearly 3 decades ago!
What a lawyer he would have made if HE passed the bar!
Though, I find it rather disturbing that Ellison refers to himself as a “working writer” when he’s trying to piggyback on someone else’s 1800 page Star Trek opus
If you ever write a novel/screenply, and someone takes your ideas and uses them for another work, and doesn’t get your permission, do you promise not to care?
Well, if it was work-for-hire as part of a serial, and I said the final version was a butchering of my work, and the story elements (which are not quite the same as the raw ideas) are used in a spin-off or sequel that outweighs my original by a good 30 times, and it’s the dozenth or more time its happened without prior comment by me, then, yeah, I won’t care. I’d rather not even know about it, honestly. Water under the bridge.
Though, I have considered the possibility of someone using my work (not any work I’ve done, but my work), and I do admit I would go in to get what was due to me. However, the analogous situation to that would be the “Star Trek: The Next Generation” episode “Sub Rosa” and Ann Rice’s “The Witching Hour.”
Steve, if you think Ellison wastes time on lawsuits he doesn’t think he can win, you don’t know him very well. Ellison vs. Robertson in which he took on AOL. Settled in Ellison’s favor in 2004. Ellison vs. ABC-TV and Paramount, 1980. Better known as the Brillo/Future Cop case. Ellison gets a $337,000 settlement. Ellison vs James Cameron for his claim that elements of The Terminator were based on two episodes of The Outer Limits. Ellison wins an out of court settlement plus a retroactive acknowledgement in the end credits from that point on. Ellison claims on his website that he’s 16/0 in terms of lawsuits, which suggests that just maybe he knows what he’s doing. Or as Peter himself pointed out in the title of his blog about Ellison’s AOL win in June 18, 2004, ‘I always win.’
PAD, on a completely unrelated note, I’m very upset with you. How am I supposed to appreciate the grim-and-gritty, cinéma vérité nature of Fin Fang Foom now that you’ve pointed out that he flies with vestigial wings??
John –
If Ellison managed to sign a contract where he retained the rights
One point I’ve seen mentioned elsewhere is that, to a degree, this may be true: that Ellison managed to retain the rights… to his original script.
But not the version that actually aired, which is what Crucible works from. And which Star Trek fiction is allowed to work from without Ellison’s input.
Joe Nazzaro –
which suggests that just maybe he knows what he’s doing
Or that he spends too much time bringing lawsuits against people. Maybe he could get involved in the technology patent business? He’d make a better killing there. 😛
Of course, I’d take this whole situation in stride if Ellison weren’t making threats against everybody and anybody involved with the book and turning this into a personal vendetta.
The comments on his blog did nothing to help me see his side of things. To be brutally honest, his little rant reminds me of the way Byrne normally acts – a ‘I’m right, you’re scum’ attitude.
Correct me if I am wrong but Ellison has a case here.
Edith Keeler wasn’t ever used as a character in any of the new Trek novels.
The least they could have done was ask permission to use the character, as Peter has.
By not asking permission to use Keeler in a novel series may open Pocket up to litigation.
I just have a feeling after all is said in done we will see as we did in Cameron’s Terminator “acknowledgment to the works of Harlan Ellison” somewhere in future editions…..
More thoughts on the Ellison thing….
I just have a feeling that Ellison would not rant about this on his website unless he had cause to. …and a possible way to have a case that has merit….
I am sure he consulted with the people that represent him before started this in the first place.
“Posted by Hulkin Vulcan”
Raaaaa Logic Smash!
JAC
For what it’s worth, I just started reading ‘Cruicble: McCoy’ and so far, to quote the spotlight character of book two: “Fascinating.”
But my main question is:
When all is said and done, depending upon the outcome, how much liability does the author David R. George III have?
In his intro, it’s clear that he had the backing of both his editor and the licensor’s (CBS/Viacom/Paramount) representative to write the trilogy. So what is his status in all this?
Also, will the concluding volumes to the trilogy be published?
One would think that an author contracted to write a novel in a franchise would expect any potential legalities to have been hammered out by those who have contracted him to do the work.
Of course, from what I recall of Ellison’s rant, his ire seems to be focused on Pocket and Paramount, so I doubt David R. George III is in much, if any legal danger.
-Rex Hondo-
Posted by Darren J Hudak
You’re right, Peggy Lee isn’t the only one with forsight. Orson Welles had the forsight to protect Citizen Kane from being colorized, (he actually put in his contract “cannot change the black and white” photography of the film”), decades befor the technoligy to colorize a film existed.
The classic cse here is William Boyd, who got rich by foreseeing that television was going to need programming and would pay for it.
He did the “Hopalong Cassidy” films for (basically) union scale (less than he could have gotten, he has some clout) and all television rights.
The studio brass thought he was crazy, and signed off on it.
And comes the time that teevee needed programming for kids, there was Wiliiam Boyd with the rights to something like seventy short feature films.
And the rights to make more specifically for teevee in the mid fifties…
Darren J. Hudak: What I find curious is why this is only coming up now, Edith Keebler…
Luigi Novi: (Snicker.) Images of Kirk trying to save the entire future of a cookie empire… 🙂
And Peter, I just finished Fall of Knight last night. Awesome way to end the trilogy! 🙂
“…Edith Keebler…
No, it’s Spock who had the pointy ears. And I’m pretty sure there were no cookies in COTEOF.”
Cookies Out of the Tree of Forever?
Actually, doing a story that retroactively changes her name to Edith Keebler throughout the timeline would probably solve things. And get a nifty sponsor ontop of it. You know. Elves, man.
Correct me if I am wrong but Ellison has a case here.
Edith Keeler wasn’t ever used as a character in any of the new Trek novels
I could be wrong here, but I think that unlike television, the use of characters in book tie-ins doesn’t involve paying royalties to the original author
// You’re right, Peggy Lee isn’t the only one with forsight. Orson Welles had the forsight to protect Citizen Kane from being colorized, (he actually put in his contract “cannot change the black and white” photography of the film”), decades befor the technoligy to colorize a film existed.
The classic cse here is William Boyd, who got rich by foreseeing that television was going to need programming and would pay for it.
He did the “Hopalong Cassidy” films for (basically) union scale (less than he could have gotten, he has some clout) and all television rights.
The studio brass thought he was crazy, and signed off on it.
And comes the time that teevee needed programming for kids, there was Wiliiam Boyd with the rights to something like seventy short feature films.
And the rights to make more specifically for teevee in the mid fifties… //
And lets not forget, that George Lucus asked for, and got, the merchendizing and sequal rights to a little film called “Star Wars”, at the time the head of 20th Century Fox was convincied the film would be a minor flop, (who could know), so who cared about sequals and besides movies studios really didn’t make much on toys and t-shirts and things, (Lucus, genious that he was, changed that).
// Correct me if I am wrong but Ellison has a case here.
Edith Keeler wasn’t ever used as a character in any of the new Trek novels. //
The Guardian, (also a character created by HE), has appeared in several novels. And Edith has made small cameo flashback appearances in at least two books I can think of.
// The least they could have done was ask permission to use the character, as Peter has. //
Would be a nice thing to do, OTOH, should Pocket have to do that everytime a novel uses a character or concept from the greater Trek universe? What about other license, the comics, video games, role playing? For that matter, what about future use in TV spin offs or movies? Just being devils advocate here.
// I just have a feeling after all is said in done we will see as we did in Cameron’s Terminator “acknowledgment to the works of Harlan Ellison” somewhere in future editions….. //
I suspect you’re correct. Interesting to note that Ellison did not win a lawsuit in that case, he threatened one and the producers and the studio settled and it really ticked off James’s Cameron that they did. He said in many interview that he didn’t plagerize and he wanted the thing to go to court so he could “clear his name”. And to be honest I think Cameron has a point, I’m not sure if it had gone to court Ellison would have won that case.