Sunday, 17 June 2018

Terry Gilliam Loses His Don Quixote Court Case And No Longer Holds The Rights To The Film

quote [ “The ruling means that the rights to the film belong to Alfama. Any exploitation of the film up until now has been completely illegal and without the authorization of Alfama,” said Branco, in an interview with Screen Daily. “We will be seeking damages with interest from all the people involved in this illegal production and above all, all those who were complicit in its illegal exploitation. We’re holding everyone responsible.” ]

Worst case, a pristine 4k torrent suddenly becomes available, from an "unknown source." Gilliam just had a stroke a few weeks ago; I doubt he gives a flying fuck through a rolling doughnut what Paulo Branco thinks he owns. Case summary in extended.

Gilliam: Hey, will you give me some money to buy a truck?
Branco: Ok, but if I give you the money, I want the right to use the truck whenever I need it.
Gilliam: Ok, that's fair.
(Later, Gilliam buys truck with money from someone else.)
Branco: Hey, I want the truck.
Gilliam: No. You didn't give me any money to buy the truck.
Branco: But I said I would give you the money to buy the truck. It doesn't matter that you didn't use my money to buy the truck. You broke the agreement. Give me the truck.
Gilliam: Fuck you.
[SFW] [art] [+6 WTF]
[by midden]
<-- Entry / Comment History

Kama-Kiri said @ 5:40am GMT on 18th June
IANAL, but as I see it Branco doesn't have to prove anything except that he has a contract with Gilliam's signature.

"But I was gonna fund the movie eventually, if you hadn't been so impatient" *is* a legitimate claim, if Gilliam didn't formally seek to terminate the contract or whatever timeframe written into the contract was not violated. In that case Gilliam is the one in breach of contract.

Going with Midden's truck analogy,

Branco: I'll give you money to buy a truck for me.
Gilliam: Okay.
(Gilliam goes and borrows money from someone else to buy a truck.)
Branco: we agreed you'd buy a truck for me, why didn't you?
Gilliam: I figured you wouldn't give me the money.
Branco: WTF? Lawyer up, bro.

To be clear, it is not Gilliam's movie just because he made it. A movie is owned by whoever pays for it to be made.


Kama-Kiri said @ 5:43am GMT on 18th June
IANAL, but as I see it Branco doesn't have to prove anything except that he has a contract with Gilliam's signature.

"But I was gonna fund the movie eventually, if you hadn't been so impatient" *is* a legitimate claim, if Gilliam didn't formally seek to terminate the contract or whatever timeframe written into the contract was not violated. In that case Gilliam is the one in breach of contract.

Going with Midden's truck analogy,

Branco: I'll give you money to build a truck for me.
Gilliam: Okay.
(Gilliam goes and gets money from someone else to built a truck.)
Branco: we agreed you'd build a truck for me, why didn't you?
Gilliam: I figured you wouldn't give me the money.
Branco: I want my truck! Lawyer up, bro.

To be clear, it is not Gilliam's movie just because he made it. A movie is owned by whoever pays for it to be made, he has only as many rights to it as he negotiated in his contract with the investors.


Kama-Kiri said @ 5:43am GMT on 18th June
IANAL, but as I see it Branco doesn't have to prove anything except that he has a contract with Gilliam's signature.

"But I was gonna fund the movie eventually, if you hadn't been so impatient" *is* a legitimate claim, if Gilliam didn't formally seek to terminate the contract or whatever timeframe written into the contract was not violated. In that case Gilliam is the one in breach of contract.

Going with Midden's truck analogy,

Branco: I'll give you money to build a truck for me.
Gilliam: Okay.
(Gilliam goes and gets money from someone else to build a truck.)
Branco: we agreed you'd build a truck for me, why didn't you?
Gilliam: I figured you wouldn't give me the money.
Branco: I want my truck! Lawyer up, bro.

To be clear, it is not Gilliam's movie just because he made it. A movie is owned by whoever pays for it to be made, he has only as many rights to it as he negotiated in his contract with the investors.



<-- Entry / Current Comment
Kama-Kiri said @ 5:40am GMT on 18th June
IANAL, but as I see it Branco doesn't have to prove anything except that he has a contract with Gilliam's signature.

"But I was gonna fund the movie eventually, if you hadn't been so impatient" *is* a legitimate claim, if Gilliam didn't formally seek to terminate the contract or whatever timeframe written into the contract was not violated. In that case Gilliam is the one in breach of contract.

Going with Midden's truck analogy,

Branco: I'll give you money to build a truck for me.
Gilliam: Okay.
(Gilliam goes and gets money from someone else to build a truck.)
Branco: we agreed you'd build a truck for me, why didn't you?
Gilliam: I figured you wouldn't give me the money.
Branco: I want my truck! Lawyer up, bro.

To be clear, it is not Gilliam's movie just because he made it. A movie is owned by whoever pays for it to be made, he has only as many rights to it as he negotiated in his contract with the investors.




Posts of Import
Karma
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things

Karma Rankings
ScoobySnacks
HoZay
Paracetamol
Ankylosaur
lilmookieesquire