Star Wars, Alien, etc. novelization dispute

[Ryujin]

According to this post by the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America guild, it would appear that The House of Mouse feels that when your contracted screenplay novelization writer is fighting stage 4 cancer, that's a perfect time to not pay him. Alan Dean Foster has written a ton of such novelizations and sparked the Star Wars Extended Universe with "Splinter of the Minds Eye." Elsewhere I've heard that their alleged reasoning is they purchased the rights to, but not the obligations for, said novelizations. They're running the production companies as wholly owned subsidiaries and have not just purchased specific properties, so I don't understand that reasoning.

#DisneyMustPay Alan Dean Foster - SFWA

Alan Dean Foster and SFWA President Mary Robinette Kowal discuss the non-payment by Disney of several contracts for works including multiple Star Wars and Aliens novelizations.

www.sfwa.org

 

[Morrus]

It’s not good reasoning, that’s why you don’t understand it. And hopefully something will be done about it.

When you purchase a company, as Disney did with Lucasfilm, you purchase its assets and liabilities. You don’t get to ignore the latter.

 

[Ryujin]

It’s not good reasoning, that’s why you don’t understand it. And hopefully something will be done about it.

When you purchase a company, as Disney did with Lucasfilm, you purchase its assets and liabilities. You don’t get to ignore the latter.

Indeed. If the companies in question had been hacked up and sold off, their reasoning might hold some water. Not likely, but perhaps, based on the wording of contracts that no one has seen. I would guess that there was some sort of 'changing of the guard' at Disney around the time that (correction) 20th Century Studios was acquired, as that seems to be the trigger to cutting off the royalties for both the Universal properties, and the Star Wars properties.

That Disney would require a NDA prior to even beginning negotiations is also... confusing.

 

[Umbran]

Indeed. If the companies in question had been hacked up and sold off, their reasoning might hold some water.

If that'd happened, they'd be able to tell you exactly who held the liability. If you break up responsibility for contracts, you have to document this as part of the purchase agreement.

I am sure the House of Mouse knows darned sure that the argument is bogus. I suspect it is a delaying tactic - hold off the liabilities now, so the books look a little better. Either there will be no court case, or it will take forever, and the liability can hit the books later, when the company isn't taking such a big economic drubbing.

That Disney would require a NDA prior to even beginning negotiations is also... confusing.

"Confusing" is not the right word. It should be entirely understandable - if a company wants to give someone the shaft, it is really better if nobody talks about it, right?

Disney likely feels it has enough lawyers to hold off any legal assault, and they guess that few enough people care about Mr. Foster (and any other creators they are also similarly shafting), that the incredibly bad optics of pauperizing a creator with cancer and a terminally ill wife won't be a big deal.

 

[Morrus]

Disney likely feels it has enough lawyers to hold off any legal assault, and they guess that few enough people care about Mr. Foster (and any other creators they are also similarly shafting), that the incredibly bad optics of pauperizing a creator with cancer and a terminally ill-wife won't be a big deal.

It probably isn't, to them. Most people aren't going to boycott Disney, even if they claim they will.

 

[Umbran]

It probably isn't, to them. Most people aren't going to boycott Disney, even if they claim they will.

Yep. Who reading this is going to say, "Yeah, that's horrible - I'm giving up The Mandalorian until they pay up!"?

 

[Retreater]

I wonder how much Foster's royalties are on a 40+ year old book? I would expect that to be a drop in the bucket compared to what Lucasfilm makes off the sale of Baby Yoda Funko Pops. Just give the man his money.

 

[billd91]

If that'd happened, they'd be able to tell you exactly who held the liability. If you break up responsibility for contracts, you have to document this as part of the purchase agreement.

I am sure the House of Mouse knows darned sure that the argument is bogus. I suspect it is a delaying tactic - hold off the liabilities now, so the books look a little better. Either there will be no court case, or it will take forever, and the liability can hit the books later, when the company isn't taking such a big economic drubbing.

I doubt it. They weren't paying ADF during fatter years, trying to justify not paying him in a lean year shouldn't fly. More likely they though they think they can get away with it and grind out anybody's ability to sue.

 

[Ryujin]

I wonder how much Foster's royalties are on a 40+ year old book? I would expect that to be a drop in the bucket compared to what Lucasfilm makes off the sale of Baby Yoda Funko Pops. Just give the man his money.

Some will still sell and, given the sheer volume of such novelizations, it should make for a reasonable living. Keep in mind that he also did the novelization for "The Force Awakens" and "Alien: Covenant." It's not all in the distant past.

 

[Umbran]

I doubt it. They weren't paying ADF during fatter years, trying to justify not paying him in a lean year shouldn't fly. More likely they though they think they can get away with it and grind out anybody's ability to sue.

I don't mean this as a lean/fat year thing. Just in general - putting off liabilities for as log as possible is a common enough tactic. And it doesn't have to be a top-level strategy. Whatever divisions these royalties fall into make be putting things off to make their specific numbers look better. Maybe it'll coem due, maybe it won't.