Sweatpea Entertainment suing WotC over film.

25. Wizards-controlled TSR began to meddle and interfere with the production [of the original D&D movie]. For example, TSR complained that the budget was too low, even though it had no contractual right to do so, and it refused to grant Sweetpea’s request for an extension for the principal photography deadline to take advantage of spring flowers in Romania, where the motion picture was being filmed.

Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...ment-suing-WotC-over-film/page3#ixzz2fJU4s8yi

LOL. Yeah, because THAT'S the reason the movie sucked. :D
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Carlin is dead, so he would make a Ben Aug Lack acting so much better! :) Skimming the topic it looks the movie rights deal was done in good faith on both parties. But the contract wording was bad,
 

The agreement doesn't allow movies to be made. Does it say anything about tv shows or a mini-series?


Seems to me that WoTC could film a "mini-series" and then just put all of the parts together into a "special edition omnibus" which would effectively be a movie without technically being a movie.
 

Wait! Then he couldn't do batma..... oh.

Sure he could. That movie is already in production. This fictional fan generated movie would be months before its in production. We would have to do a Kickstarter or get backing in another way. Somehow get Kevin Smith involved. Then fill up the Underworld with liquid nitrogen.
 

The agreement doesn't allow movies to be made. Does it say anything about tv shows or a mini-series?


Seems to me that WoTC could film a "mini-series" and then just put all of the parts together into a "special edition omnibus" which would effectively be a movie without technically being a movie.
The first amendment to the agreeement, over the course of clauses 11 to 15, grants Sweetpea the right to make D&D TV shows and precludes TSR/WotC/Hasbro from using "D&D" as the name of a TV show, or from licensing anyone else to do so. WotC does have the right to use D&D or AD&D as secondary titles,

in a size no greater than 50% of the size of the primary artwork title and in no case above or before the primary artwork title in such productions.​

But WotC can do animated movies or animated TV shows.
 

The first amendment to the agreeement, over the course of clauses 11 to 15, grants Sweetpea the right to make D&D TV shows and precludes TSR/WotC/Hasbro from using "D&D" as the name of a TV show, or from licensing anyone else to do so. WotC does have the right to use D&D or AD&D as secondary titles,
in a size no greater than 50% of the size of the primary artwork title and in no case above or before the primary artwork title in such productions.​

But WotC can do animated movies or animated TV shows.


I didn't see that on my brief glazing over of the case earlier.

I'm amazed that anyone would ever agree to what was agreed upon. Overall, it seems as though Sweetpea has a good case.
 

I'm amazed that anyone would ever agree to what was agreed upon. Overall, it seems as though Sweetpea has a good case.
I tend to agree with your second sentence. As to the first, I'm curious whether WotC negotiated poorly in its late-90s settlement, or whether the amendment was the best they could extract.
 

The first amendment to the agreeement, over the course of clauses 11 to 15, grants Sweetpea the right to make D&D TV shows and precludes TSR/WotC/Hasbro from using "D&D" as the name of a TV show, or from licensing anyone else to do so. WotC does have the right to use D&D or AD&D as secondary titles,
in a size no greater than 50% of the size of the primary artwork title and in no case above or before the primary artwork title in such productions.​

But WotC can do animated movies or animated TV shows.

So why haven't they?!!:rant:
 


Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top