Lord Of The Rings Fan Film To Debut... Raising Some Copyright Questions

from the that's-quality dept

Stephen Turner alerted us to a story about an impressive looking fan film "prequel" to Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings trilogy that is being released this weekend. The project cost all of £3,000 and involves a huge cast and crew of volunteer fans -- but still looks amazingly professional (and stunningly like some of the real actors/characters in Jackson's version):

Once again, we're seeing how modern technology allows people to create nearly the equivalent of a high budget production on a shoestring budget. But, of course, there are copyright questions raised by this whole thing. Tom sends in another version of this story that quotes the EFF's Fred von Lohman saying that it's not at all clear if the film violates anyone's copyright. While the characters are the same, the story was created by a fan. In the original link above, the guy behind the project, Chris Bouchard, notes that he "got in touch with Tolkien Enterprises and reached an understanding with them that as long as we are completely non-profit then we're okay." So, it's unlikely that any copyright lawsuit will arise from this, but the original question does remain: what if people made such a creative film without reaching such an agreement -- or without promising to be totally non-commercial? Would that be so wrong? It wouldn't take away from or harm Tolkien or Jackson's work. It would only enhance it. So why should these fans even need to gain permission to create such a movie?

53 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Do J.R.R. Tolkien's Kids Deserve Money For The Lord Of The Rings Movies?

from the what-did-they-have-to-do-with-it dept

There are some competing opinion pieces in the LA Times, starting off with one siding with J.R.R. Tolkien's kids in their legal fight for royalties from the Lord of the Rings trilogy movies:

Tolkien obviously isn't Peter Jackson, who directed the franchise, or Liv Tyler or Viggo Mortensen, who starred in it, or New Line Cinema, the studio that financed it, or Miramax, which owned the film rights for a second but couldn't get the movie made, or producer Saul Zaentz, who bought the rights in 1976. He's just the guy who dreamed up the cosmology, the whole shebang of hobbits and dwarfs, orcs, ents, wargs, trolls, whatnot.

Then, there's the other side, pointing out that while it might be true that they legally deserve the money, it doesn't make any common sense:

I find it offensive to common sense to argue that the heirs of J.R.R. Tolkien (who are as dismayingly numerous as Kennedys in the court filing) are entitled to a shilling for work in which they had no hand and which was completed in 1949.

Most of the essay focuses on the question of the length of copyright, which we all know has been expanded to ridiculous lengths. However, it does seem like a reasonable question to ask why the kids of Tolkien deserve money for a movie they had nothing to do with based on an idea they had nothing to do with.

97 Comments | Leave a Comment..