Hines - 'Im being bullied!'

[Gnorn]

dudalb said:

I wonder if people who say this have the same attitude when it comes to their own copyrighted material. I really doubt it.

That's the point... Wells is dead! The people owning the copyright now, are only in it for the money, not to protect some sort of work THEY created.

-Gnorn

[mctoddridesagain]

That's capitalism for you. The copyright laws exist, and expecting those who hold rights not to use them is to ask the lion to lie down with the antelope.

[Selkirk]

Exactly - it all comes down to money, and that's the sad part because somewhere along the line the piece in question (in this case, HGW's story) loses a bit of it's soul and becomes nothing more than dollar signs in the eyes of the combatants.

My reference to 'A Christmas Carol' was not so much about copyright as it was about variety. Individuals and companies get so riled up thinking that "the other guy" is going to tell the story better than them and thus take away a portian of their money. And while that is going on, well, see my first comment on this post. Again I say, "Just let the stories be told." There's enough to go around.

On a personal note, it has always humored me when people get into a twist about material that they "own." They did not CREATE said materiel, but they OWN it. Other than $$$$$$ (do we see a pattern here) why would somebody want to own another person's body of work? It's like Michael Jackson buying a portion (I don't know the specifics) of the Beatles catalog. For what? We all know who wrote the songs no matter what car commercial they show up in (metaphorically speaking).

So, what's REALLY going on between Hines and Paramount? I don't know and quit frankly, I don't much care. As I said in my original statement: the ones who lose out here are the fans. Two individuals have the opportunity to retell one man's story - each in their own way. But instead, we - the fans - get to sit back and shake our heads and debate their motives and tactics. Bottom line: this big 'ol world is going to keep spinning no matter how many versions hit the screens at one time.

[FALLINGSTAR]

Selkirk said:

Exactly - it all comes down to money, and that's the sad part because somewhere along the line the piece in question (in this case, HGW's story) loses a bit of it's soul and becomes nothing more than dollar signs in the eyes of the combatants.

My reference to 'A Christmas Carol' was not so much about copyright as it was about variety. Individuals and companies get so riled up thinking that "the other guy" is going to tell the story better than them and thus take away a portian of their money. And while that is going on, well, see my first comment on this post. Again I say, "Just let the stories be told." There's enough to go around.

On a personal note, it has always humored me when people get into a twist about material that they "own." They did not CREATE said materiel, but they OWN it. Other than $$$$$$ (do we see a pattern here) why would somebody want to own another person's body of work? It's like Michael Jackson buying a portion (I don't know the specifics) of the Beatles catalog. For what? We all know who wrote the songs no matter what car commercial they show up in (metaphorically speaking).

So, what's REALLY going on between Hines and Paramount? I don't know and quit frankly, I don't much care. As I said in my original statement: the ones who lose out here are the fans. Two individuals have the opportunity to retell one man's story - each in their own way. But instead, we - the fans - get to sit back and shake our heads and debate their motives and tactics. Bottom line: this big 'ol world is going to keep spinning no matter how many versions hit the screens at one time.

True. Even though I've criticised certain aspects of Pendragon at least they appear to be trying to please the fans of the book.

Paramount as usual couldn't give a stuff about the fans of the book and all they're thinking about is dollars. It will most probably be the fans who lose out as you say.