Quote:

---

Originally posted by Zeek:
I'm not sure I understand the theory that Fox loses its rights to the series in the first place.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Zeek:
I'm not sure I understand the theory that Fox loses its rights to the series in the first place.

---

I've personally decided that the "rights reversion" theory is bunk that people just really want to believe. Been hearing it for a decade, and not once has anyone been able to supply anything approaching proof. It's always "I heard..." stuff.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by peer:


Well, contracts are often on a ten-year-expiration date, if the deal is not fulfilled (i.e. show is cancelled etc.).

---

Quote:

---

O
If it were a licensed property, maybe. But the show was created under work-for-hire laws for FOX. Unless Joss had something specifically put into the contract that says otherwise (and he would have had little reason to at the time, nor would Fox have much incentive to agree to it) Fox would own the IP (intellectual property) in perpetuity.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by peer:

Quote:

---

O
If it were a licensed property, maybe. But the show was created under work-for-hire laws for FOX. Unless Joss had something specifically put into the contract that says otherwise (and he would have had little reason to at the time, nor would Fox have much incentive to agree to it) Fox would own the IP (intellectual property) in perpetuity.

---

Ah, thats why I wrote I dont the specifics ;-)
I thought about licened property (I work in a different field, by I do license my craetive property, normally with ten-year-contracts). If it was written i work.for.hire there is really no knowing about the details - every company (hell, often every employee) works under different circumstances.
But Universal was able to get the right apparently, see serenity and see the reruns on syfy. But again, I guess nobody knows anything particular.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Actually, I don't think it was under work for hire. Joss approached Fox with his idea. In work for hire, the studio approaches the writer with the idea they want them to produce, then hires them to write it.

Therefore Joss owns the IP (which is why he was able to shop around for other networks and then sell movie rights to Universal), Fox Studio owns the tv series production rights, the Science channel currently owns the tv broadcast rights (which has traded hands some), and Universal owns the movie rights, which they've merchandised as comic books through Dark Horse.

---

Quote:

---

A work made for hire (sometimes abbreviated as work for hire or WFH) is an exception to the general rule that the person who actually creates a work is the legally-recognized author of that work. According to copyright law in the United States and certain other copyright jurisdictions, if a work is "made for hire", the employer—not the employee—is considered the legal author. In some countries, this is known as corporate authorship. The incorporated entity serving as an employer may be a corporation or other legal entity, an organization, or an individual.

....

The U.S. Constitution requires the initial owner of a copyright in a work be the author.[1] In most cases, the author is the individual or group of individuals that actually creates the work. However, when a work is created by an employee as part of his or her job, or when certain kinds of works are created on behalf of a client and all parties agree in writing to the designation, a work may be a "work for hire". The author of a work for hire is never the actual creator. Instead, the author is the person or entity that hired the actual creator.[2] The above U.S. Constitutional requirement is why the employer or paying client is considered the "author" in a work for hire, contrary to standard usage of the word "author", because a law directing copyright be awarded to an employer or client instead of the author would be unconstitutional.

....

A "work made for hire" is— (1) a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment; or (2) a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire.

---