I'm guessing that means they are trying to re-sell the rights for some if not the entire catalog? I can only imagine until the dust clears, that any forthcoming Bergman - whether standard DVD or otherwise - will be a long time coming. Svensk Filmindustri seems to holding onto the actual elements and not paying out what is owed, while Isis, as noted in the article is garnishing current contracts with American studios (and I'm guessing Criterion) to collect what they can. I would imagine Criterion is going to stay the hell away from any new releases until all the legal ducks are in a row.Isis is now considering how to obtain the highest value for the assets, including Bergman's "Fanny and Alexander" and "Wild Strawberries," as well as classics by Lasse Hallstrom and Ake Ohberg.
Isis Litigation, Svensk Filmindustri, and the Bergman titles
- Antoine Doinel
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
- Location: Montreal, Quebec
- Contact:
Isis Litigation, Svensk Filmindustri, and the Bergman titles
So the battle for the rights to Ingmar Bergman's films continues, with a recent ruling handing rights to the Aspen, Colorado based Isis Litigation. This little bit of info is intriguing:
- aox
- Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:02 pm
- Location: nYc
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
damn it.
anyway, forgive my ignorance, but does that mean the Trilogy, Fanny & Alexander, 4 Masterpieces boxes may go out of print?
additionally, does this mean no Seventh Seal BR?
anyway, forgive my ignorance, but does that mean the Trilogy, Fanny & Alexander, 4 Masterpieces boxes may go out of print?
additionally, does this mean no Seventh Seal BR?
- HerrSchreck
- Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
Seventh Seal is already out on a supposedly excellent BD edition in R2.aox wrote:damn it.
anyway, forgive my ignorance, but does that mean the Trilogy, Fanny & Alexander, 4 Masterpieces boxes may go out of print?
additionally, does this mean no Seventh Seal BR?
In or out of print, what are you waiting for viz key CC releases like the Trilogy (my fave Bergs) or Fanny & Alexand (if there's a better for-the-whole-family-yet-still-a-great-film film out there I've not heard of it)?
-
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 1:05 am
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
I hate legal disputes over film rights, this means that any hope for Bergman titles by Criterion are in a standstill and make take forever to come out. Maybe, Criterion won't be able to release it at all. I'm just hoping that Criterion will be able to release them. Other studios will just ruin the films. This news sucks.
- arsonfilms
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:53 pm
- Location: Philadelphia, PA
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
I really don't know much about contract law, but wouldn't the courts honor Criterion's existing licensing agreement regardless of who the current rights holder is? In my mind the renewal contracts would be with Isis, as Criterion still would have paid for everything they've licensed. If not, I'd think Criterion would have some further legal recourse with Svensk.
Does anyone with a better understanding of this sort of thing have some insight?
Does anyone with a better understanding of this sort of thing have some insight?
- Michael Kerpan
- Spelling Bee Champeen
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
- Location: New England
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
Isis _Litigation_ ?
Rights to 1200 films seized because of unpaid rent for an Aspen movie theater?
Sounds very much like "creative use" of the highly problematic American legal system.
Rights to 1200 films seized because of unpaid rent for an Aspen movie theater?
Sounds very much like "creative use" of the highly problematic American legal system.
- Antoine Doinel
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
- Location: Montreal, Quebec
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
The short answer is no. Even if the contract was made with both parties thinking everything was above board, it doesn't matter if the rights belonged to someone else at the time. See the Watchmen dispute between Fox and WB.arsonfilms wrote:I really don't know much about contract law, but wouldn't the courts honor Criterion's existing licensing agreement regardless of who the current rights holder is?
- arsonfilms
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:53 pm
- Location: Philadelphia, PA
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
This doesn't sound like an issue though of thinking everything is above board, though. What happened with Watchmen was that Fox held the rights all along and nobody else knew about it. Here, the rights are being taken over by someone else. Criterion's licenses from Svensk were legitimate, but now Svensk is losing those rights to someone else. I find it hard to believe that the court system wouldn't honor a legitimate licensing agreement after it awarded the rights to someone else as compensation.Antoine Doinel wrote:The short answer is no. Even if the contract was made with both parties thinking everything was above board, it doesn't matter if the rights belonged to someone else at the time. See the Watchmen dispute between Fox and WB.arsonfilms wrote:I really don't know much about contract law, but wouldn't the courts honor Criterion's existing licensing agreement regardless of who the current rights holder is?
- Tom Hagen
- Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 12:35 pm
- Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
Jesus Christ! An organization with the word "Litigation" in its name now owns Bergman's films because of a dispute over a fucking theater in Colorado? Talk about your existential dread!
Stuff like this embarrasses me for having ever stepped foot inside a law school classroom.
Stuff like this embarrasses me for having ever stepped foot inside a law school classroom.
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
Not to worry, everyone! I just read that Beatrice Welles has been called in to handle the negotiations
- Antoine Doinel
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
- Location: Montreal, Quebec
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
I was only speculating, but as the article points out Svensk has spent years ignoring court orders, and if Isis has been able to garnish money from existing contracts from the majors, it makes me wonder how valid Criterion's contracts with Svensk were and if Isis has a legitimate claim to any proceeds from DVD sales. What makes me sit up and take notice is that the majors haven't (publicly) fought Isis on this. Studios will generally fight claims of ownership to the death rather than pay out which makes me think Isis has a rather ironclad court order. Obviously, we'd need more info on the whens and whats of Criterion's Svensk contract but we're not likely to find that out.
As for the Fox case (and this should probably move to the Watchmen thread) but the short and dirty version is that WB was aware they held the rights but went ahead anyway. It's a poor comparison to be using at all in this situation anyway. I retract that.
As for the Fox case (and this should probably move to the Watchmen thread) but the short and dirty version is that WB was aware they held the rights but went ahead anyway. It's a poor comparison to be using at all in this situation anyway. I retract that.
- Antoine Doinel
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
- Location: Montreal, Quebec
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
And by "handle the negotiations" you mean "claim ownership of the films".domino harvey wrote:Not to worry, everyone! I just read that Beatrice Welles has been called in to handle the negotiations
Coming soon: Fanny & Alexander: The Beatrice Welles Version You've Never Seen! in full screen and THX surround sound OMG
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
You haven't lived until you've heard the uncle fart in Dolby
- Michael Kerpan
- Spelling Bee Champeen
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
- Location: New England
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
This does not seem to be a typical rights dispute.
As far as I can tell. Isis Litigation has simply seized essentially all the assets of SFI as satisfaction for a judgment rendered in connection with a lease that SFI helped guarantee. I suspect that these assets far exceed the value of the debt involved. This is a maneuver to ensure the judgment is paid -- and I doubt that Isis Litigation will ultimately wind up with rights to any films on a permanent basis. (I once helped "seize" all the stock of a holding company through which all a judgment debtor's cash flowed -- the judgment got paid pretty quickly thereafter and promptly got his stock back, SFI seems to be a lot more stubborn).
In any event, any agreements that SFI made prior to IL's recent asset seizure would stand. If IL actually takes real ownership of any of these film rights, however, they would take them subject to any pre-existing valid contracts.
As far as I can tell. Isis Litigation has simply seized essentially all the assets of SFI as satisfaction for a judgment rendered in connection with a lease that SFI helped guarantee. I suspect that these assets far exceed the value of the debt involved. This is a maneuver to ensure the judgment is paid -- and I doubt that Isis Litigation will ultimately wind up with rights to any films on a permanent basis. (I once helped "seize" all the stock of a holding company through which all a judgment debtor's cash flowed -- the judgment got paid pretty quickly thereafter and promptly got his stock back, SFI seems to be a lot more stubborn).
In any event, any agreements that SFI made prior to IL's recent asset seizure would stand. If IL actually takes real ownership of any of these film rights, however, they would take them subject to any pre-existing valid contracts.
- Antoine Doinel
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
- Location: Montreal, Quebec
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
Right, but the fact that their actively seeking how to make the most out of these "assets" seems to indicate they are looking to liquidate which means they could into some very dubious hands, very quickly.
- arsonfilms
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:53 pm
- Location: Philadelphia, PA
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
This is of course a concern, especially if a third party owner were to step in and refuse to renew any pre-existing licensing contracts, but I think that this would depend on the initial length of each licensing agreement. Janus served as the original theatrical distributor on a lot of these films, and may own the US rights outright or at least have them licensed in perpetuity.Antoine Doinel wrote:Right, but the fact that their actively seeking how to make the most out of these "assets" seems to indicate they are looking to liquidate which means they could into some very dubious hands, very quickly.
- Michael Kerpan
- Spelling Bee Champeen
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
- Location: New England
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
There are, in essence, two disputes here.Antoine Doinel wrote:I was only speculating, but as the article points out Svensk has spent years ignoring court orders, and if Isis has been able to garnish money from existing contracts from the majors, it makes me wonder how valid Criterion's contracts with Svensk were and if Isis has a legitimate claim to any proceeds from DVD sales. What makes me sit up and take notice is that the majors haven't (publicly) fought Isis on this. Studios will generally fight claims of ownership to the death rather than pay out which makes me think Isis has a rather ironclad court order. Obviously, we'd need more info on the whens and whats of Criterion's Svensk contract but we're not likely to find that out.
One (which is already totally finished), involved the loan guarantee given by SFI's parent company. SFI lost this and had judgment entered against it.
As to the second.... You might think that winning a case means you get the judgment money you were awarded -- but you would be wrong. Once you win, unless the other side just automatically pays up (it does happen -- sometimes), you need to initiate a NEW set of legal proceedings to actually collect your judgment. (My wife and I once got a judgment against a moving company that wrecked some furniture and lost other items, but we could never collect a penny). First, Isis Litigation tried to garnish any film rental payments (not because they owned the films -- but because the rental payments provided a collectible stream of money that could pay off the judgment, bit by bit).
Because this did not work, IL went to nuclear and "conceptually" seized the assets of SFI. Unless the Swedish courts were to honor such collection order (which would involve filing a third case, so to speak -- this time in Sweden itself), IL will never actually physically possess SFI's film library. But by "owning" these rights by virtue of a US court order, IL can create lots of (expensive) legal uncertainty for SFI (and parent) -- which IL hopes will lead to satisfaction (at last) of their ever-increasing judgment (due to interest and legal costs).
- Michael Kerpan
- Spelling Bee Champeen
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
- Location: New England
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
Can you spell "bluff"?Antoine Doinel wrote:Right, but the fact that their actively seeking how to make the most out of these "assets" seems to indicate they are looking to liquidate which means they could into some very dubious hands, very quickly.
;~}
The real question here is why SFI's parent company has behaved so cantankerously about paying a burden it (perhaps foolishly) accepted.
In any event, at this point, no business (in its right mind) would consider any deal with IL for film rights to anything in SI's catalog to be worth the paper it was written on. But what IL CAN do is make it virtually impossible for SFI to make any _future_ deals regarding its catalog (until such time as the debt is paid).
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
And we know from the leaked Janus catalog of titles that at least as far as theatrical distribution goes, many non-released Bergman titles are already secured-- and I assume Criterion already bought the home video rights for many of these before this judgment was handed down
- Antoine Doinel
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
- Location: Montreal, Quebec
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
I worked in the "public domain" DVD world long enough to know that there are all kinds of people who will acquire and claim rights for things that are clearly problematic at best. All it takes is someone with deep enough pockets and chutzpah to make the rights to Bergman's films a quagmire for decades to come. I don't put it past Isis to take that person's money, absolve their responsibility in the matter and let it play out between the "new" rights holder and Svensk.Michael Kerpan wrote:In any event, at this point, no business (in its right mind) would consider any deal with IL for film rights to anything in SI's catalog to be worth the paper it was written on. But what IL CAN do is make it virtually impossible for SFI to make any _future_ deals regarding its catalog (until such time as the debt is paid).
- Michael Kerpan
- Spelling Bee Champeen
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
- Location: New England
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
If Janus and Criterion do have to make ongoing payments to SFI (rather than having paid totally up front for the whole period), presumably Isis Litigation _could_ try to glom on to that money -- and keep it from making its way to SFI.domino harvey wrote:And we know from the leaked Janus catalog of titles that at least as far as theatrical distribution goes, many non-released Bergman titles are already secured-- and I assume Criterion already bought the home video rights for many of these before this judgment was handed down
- Michael Kerpan
- Spelling Bee Champeen
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
- Location: New England
- Contact:
Re: 'Forthcoming' Lists Discussion and Random Speculation
Possibly -- but I see Isis Litigation's strategy as being -- make life total hell for SFI -- and its parent company will finally pay up.Antoine Doinel wrote:I worked in the "public domain" DVD world long enough to know that there are all kinds of people who will acquire and claim rights for things that are clearly problematic at best. All it takes is someone with deep enough pockets and chutzpah to make the rights to Bergman's films a quagmire for decades to come. I don't put it past Isis to take that person's money, absolve their responsibility in the matter and let it play out between the "new" rights holder and Svensk.
Last edited by Michael Kerpan on Fri Jan 16, 2009 1:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Matt
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Isis Litigation, Svensk Filmindustri, and the Bergman titles
Hilarious. Isis Litigation's ClassicSwedishFilms.com website links to Criterion's when you click on "Buy DVDs." I'm sure Criterion is bouncing with joy at being dragged into this mess.
They are also offering a bounty if you narc on any unauthorized screenings. Look out, college film clubs!
They are also offering a bounty if you narc on any unauthorized screenings. Look out, college film clubs!
- Antoine Doinel
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:22 pm
- Location: Montreal, Quebec
- Contact:
Re: Isis Litigation, Svensk Filmindustri, and the Bergman titles
That site is kind of amazing.
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Re: Isis Litigation, Svensk Filmindustri, and the Bergman titles
Their site's better designed than Criterion's