Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [mythsoc] Peter Jackson lawsuit

Expand Messages
  • jack@greenmanreview.com
    ... He s *not* being piggy *if* New Line Cinema cheated on its payments. That s known as breaking a contract. Certainly they wouldn t be the first distributor
    Message 1 of 6 , Jun 27, 2005
      > Of minor interest perhaps: there is an article in the Business Section
      > of today's New York Times about a lawsuit that Peter Jackson has filed
      > against New Line Cinema for underpayment of revenues generated by FotR.
      > It does have (presumably reliable) figures on the gross revenue for the
      > three movies and an amusing quote from someone at New Line who says
      > Jackson is being piggy since he already has enough money from the
      > trilogy to rebuild Baghdad.
      >
      > Sara Ciborski

      He's *not* being piggy *if* New Line Cinema cheated on its payments. That's known as
      breaking a contract. Certainly they wouldn't be the first distributor of content, be it
      CDs, books, or film, who skimmed the profits!
    • saraciborski
      ... That s known as ... Of course not. That he s being piggy is not my view. I thought it an amusing remark from the mega-profit entertainment world. Sara
      Message 2 of 6 , Jun 27, 2005
        --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, jack@g... wrote:
        >

        >
        > He's *not* being piggy *if* New Line Cinema cheated on its payments.
        That's known as
        > breaking a contract.

        Of course not. That he's being piggy is not my view. I thought it an
        amusing remark from the mega-profit entertainment world.
        Sara
      • David Bratman
        I know we re all dying to hear more about this, so here s an article claiming that the NY Times violated its own policies by quoting an unidentified New Line
        Message 3 of 6 , Jun 29, 2005
          I know we're all dying to hear more about this, so here's an article
          claiming that the NY Times violated its own policies by quoting an
          unidentified New Line lawyer claiming that Jackson was being piggish. The
          policy says:

          "If pejorative opinions are worth reporting and cannot be specifically
          attributed, they may be paraphrased or described after thorough discussion
          between writer and editor. The vivid language of direct quotation confers
          an unfair advantage on a speaker or writer who hides behind the newspaper,
          and turns of phrase are valueless to a reader who cannot assess the source."

          <http://slate.msn.com/id/2121636/>

          DB
        • Stolzi
          ... source. ... And how boring that would be! Diamond Proudbrook
          Message 4 of 6 , Jun 29, 2005
            ----- Original Message -----

            > I know we're all dying to hear more about this, so here's an article
            > claiming that the NY Times violated its own policies by quoting an
            > unidentified New Line lawyer claiming that Jackson was being piggish. The
            > policy says:
            >
            > "If pejorative opinions are worth reporting and cannot be specifically
            > attributed, they may be paraphrased or described after thorough discussion
            > between writer and editor. The vivid language of direct quotation confers
            > an unfair advantage on a speaker or writer who hides behind the newspaper,
            > and turns of phrase are valueless to a reader who cannot assess the
            source."
            >

            And how boring that would be!

            Diamond Proudbrook
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.