Slashdot Log In
Firefly Fans Fight Back Against Universal
Posted by
CowboyNeal
on Sat Oct 28, 2006 08:11 AM
from the back-lashes dept.
from the back-lashes dept.
Gossi writes "What happens when a film studio and a fanbase get into bed? Fans of Joss Whedon's Firefly, and the movie by Universal Studios — Serenity — are not amused. After being encouraged to viral market Serenity, the studio has started legal action against fans (demanding $9000 in retroactive licensing fees in one case and demanding fan promotion stop), and going after Cafepress. The fans response? Retroactively invoice Universal for their services."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Missing the point (Score:4, Informative)
Main point (Score:5, Insightful)
However, that being said, Universal will disregard everything that they (and anyone else) do. It's going to take a hot poker to get Universal to do anything pro-consumer. Remember, all of the decisions are made by a group of women and men sitting at a table trying to figure out how to maximize profit. And that they are going to try to do, even if they are shortsighted about it.
Re:Missing the point (Score:5, Interesting)
Offtopic, I know, but here's my theory: It's due to a universal (pun not intened) misconception that a manager should focus on the "big picture" and delegate responsibilites to subordinates. So your average manager is totally out of touch with the customers, the employees, and the market. The only thing he or she sees is charts, reports and presentations, and somehow key decisions should be made with this stuff.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Serenity (Score:5, Insightful)
There are very few films I go see at the cinema and because I don't have a TV most of the promotions for them pass me by - and a lot don't appeal.
Re:Serenity (Score:5, Insightful)
Step 2: Allow viral marketing to create a demand for our product
Step 3: Sue the people from step 1
Step 4: Profit!
This has to be the most cynical thing I've ever seen.
Re:Serenity (Score:5, Funny)
So all this time, the "..." was just "Stab the guys who helped you in the back to make more money"? Damn, it's so obvious once you've seen it...
Re:Serenity (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Serenity (Score:5, Funny)
Oh bullshit (Score:5, Interesting)
There is a line between blogging about the movie and showing trailers on your web site, and marketing licensable items (like shirts). The first two are viral advertising, the latter is, well, marketing something that someone else owns as your own products.
From the fucking article:
I don't see any mention of marketing t-shirts as viral advertising.
Now while I generally think of movie executives as dick heads, but to be fare, they put up a lot of money to finance a movie that returned not so much. If they make a few million dollars on this, then good for them. They put up US$39 million dollars in production costs, around US$15 million in advertising costs, and about US$8.5 million in distribution costs [leesmovieinfo.net]. The film made US$38.3 million GROSS at the box office (meaning before the theaters take their cut). If the movie ran over production budget, or flopped, etc. You wouldn't give a rat's ass about the folks who would have lost their shirts. They paid for the right to market shirts.
Just because you REALLY REALLY like something, doesn't mean you can take if for your own and do whatever you want with it. This is also the reason we have patents (real patents, not business rules patents). If someone spends time and a lot of money to develop a new something, whether directly as an investment, or in their own time (so they can't earn money elsewhere), why do you think it should be OK for someone else to profit off of it. Or is it a matter of "if it's the little guy getting ripped, then defend the hell out of him, but if it is the big guy, or they have something you really really like, then fuck it, rob him"?
Man on the street to another guy: "Excuse me, but do you know what time it is?"
Second guy: "It's three P.M."
First guy: "Thank you... and I really really like your watch... I want to sell it to that guy over there."
Second guy: "What? Excuse me, it is my watch, I paid for it."
First guy (gathers a mob around him): "We don't care. We want it , and we're going to sell it."
I know this can easily be called a troll since there are going to be a lot of fanboys reading this thread, but really. And I happen to really really like Serenity (saw it twice in the threater), and watched and really really liked Firefly when it first came on TV... and was supremely disappointed when it was canceled. But I still think that showing trailers on your web site is one thing and selling someone else's idea as your own is another.
Re:Oh bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
1) When it comes to advertising, t-shirts are indeed... "like creating bumper stickers and gift cards"
2) Man on the street to another guy: "Excuse me, but do you know what time it is?"
Second guy: "It's three P.M."
First guy: "Thank you... and I really really like your watch... I want to sell it to that guy over there."
Second guy: "What? Excuse me, it is my watch, I paid for it."
First guy (gathers a mob around him): "We don't care. We want it , and we're going to make our own and sell it."
Second guy: "Ohhhhh....well, I'm glad that I could spark your creativity. Good luck. (shakes second guy's hand)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
THIS is NOT what we're talking about here: "We don't care. We want it , and we're going to make our own and sell it."
If it were, the t-shirts would have been "spin-offs" from the original. They would have been more like Fan Fiction, in t
Re:Serenity (Score:5, Insightful)
It was indeed a great viral marketing campaign, and most of the people/groups who participated will either be directly affected by Universal's actions (by getting a letter from Universal's lawyers) or know someone who was (often through being participants on a site that has been targeted). The thing that Universal isn't considering is that viral marketing can work to put out the negative word at least as easily as it puts out the positive ones. (It's likely it will be even more effective because people that are mad about something tend to complain to more people than they would if they were complementing something.) This will affect the sales of Serenity going forward, but Universal probably doesn't care about that as they've made the majority of the money from it already (or at least they think they have). I don't think it'll stop there though, people are going to look up what current and future stuff (as well as past titles) Universal owns, and they're going to tell others what those are and what Universal has done to fans of Serenity. It's going to have a financial impact, although it's hard to say how big of one. Univeral's throwing away future income here. I know I'm not going to be going to see any of their movies or buying any of their DVDs from now on and I doubt I'm alone.
Of course Universal will attribute any drop in sales to piracy and never figure out it's their own damn fault.
Re:Serenity (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Serenity (Score:5, Informative)
Also, some of 11th Hour artwork was used in the prepublicity material from Universal, and it's seen on the Serenity DVD in the special feature on fans.
None of 11th Hour's artwork is from the movie. It's all original. It doesn't feature characters, screen shots or anything like that. You can view it here: http://www.cafepress.com/11thhourart [cafepress.com].
Basically, what's happening here is slightly retarded. Universal's lawyers are digging themselves into a hole by not understanding what they are doing in the scheme of things.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Rule number one: (Score:5, Insightful)
And this group has a lot of spare time and energy and has shown they'll fight for something they believe in.
But of course no one is required to have any social literacy to head a major corporation. Obviously.
Re:Money Money Money / Must be funny... (Score:5, Insightful)
It can be pretty amazing what people can accomplish out of pure passion for the work, as opposed to the profit to be made from it. In this case, the fans are more than willing to make the effort. The question is, will it be for or against Universal releases of the future?
If it goes against, there could be some problems for future TV and movies from Universal, as this loyal block will remember and potentially boycott. Universal knows that the potential loss of revenue from a rabid base of fans in that much coveted "18-35 male without an understanding of credit card debt" demographic would be something advertisers would look at closely. It would certainly cost them more than the 9,000 they are looking for in liscensing fees.
Then again, the MPAA and RIAA are dumb enough to cut off the hands that feed them all the time. Why should this be any different?
Totally wrong, not a grassroots effort at all (Score:3, Insightful)
Fanbase Overboard? (Score:2, Informative)
Well, the thing is... (Score:5, Insightful)
So, well, what's the problem?
Re:Well, the thing is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
"The questionable image in my shop were, for the most part, already pulled down by Cafe Press after the first email notice I got last week."
And if you keep reading (this
Boycott (Score:5, Informative)
The Black Dahlia
Man of the Year
Idlewild
Accepted
Miami Vice
You, Me and Dupree
coming
Lets go to Prison
The Good Shepherd
Children of Men
Alpha Dog
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I don't think the boycott is going to work. How do I not see those movies any more than I was already not seeing them?
Invoicing? (Score:3, Informative)
you gotta be kidding me (Score:4, Insightful)
That said, bring back Firefly. Best sci-fi series since ST:TNG in my opinion.
Re:you gotta be kidding me (Score:5, Insightful)
I've never seen firefly (Score:4, Funny)
Can I get a retroactive refund?
if they ever try to send this invoice (Score:3, Informative)
Wrong interpretation! (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the clue bat. This is your head. This is the clue bat hitting your head.
As others have already pointed out, it's not copacetic to sell merchandise like that. You think you can start selling Star Wars t-shirts and Lucasfilm will be OK with that? Not likely.
But that is entirely beside the point. The point is that Universal believes this is a valuable franchise, and acts to protect it. They are not trying to shut down the fan community. Simply, there are people at Universal who think a Serenity sequel is a possibility, and they want to maintain control over that so when they fund the next movie they're going to get a proper ROI. That is all.
It's basically good news that they want to defend this.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Wrong interpretation! (Score:4, Interesting)
At present, this [cafepress.com] is the closest thing I could find to an infringement of any copyright or trademark on the T-shirt site in question. The product itself has no hint of infringement, and the description of the product has the word "serenity" but it's just a translation from the Chinese character in the picture on the shirt. Maybe the site used to contain more infringing stuff; I don't know. But at present, the Universal lawyers are still demanding that he take down the site (and holding the usual obscene $150,000 per instance copyright infringement damage number over his head to make sure he does it).
There is a danger to the Firefly/Serenity franchise here. Viral marketing works, but it works in both directions. The whole mythos of Firefly is about rebellion against a powerful government. If it looks like the franchise is in the hands a pseudo-government (big corporation) the most ardent fans will rebel. Of course, Firefly/Serenity has been in the hands of a big company since it was started, but the Browncoats might actually notice it now and become rather disillusioned rather than support it as fervently as they have done so far. No viral marketing means (maybe) no market. No market means no movie.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The key point IMO is that Universal allowed their trademarks to be infringed when the infringement served as "free advertising". Universal is not allowed to come back now and try to retroactively enforce their trademarks. In the lega
Well, while they're suing for IP use, why not... (Score:3, Funny)
Firefly has been one single corporate fuckup (Score:4, Interesting)
Don't you wish Bill Gates were a Sci-Fi fan? He could just finance a whole season, no strings attached, just for the heck of it, and donate the the sales of the DVD to his charity fund. I'd buy.
I am a lawyer on the wind (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
A lawyer on the wind, watch how I... *KA-CHUNK*
Well, there's that sorted out.
This just in... (Score:5, Funny)
Here we go again, FF this, Debian that... (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, Firefly. Nevermind, do carry on.
Comment from an attorney (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, they are clearly creating derivative works and would normally be violating Universal's copyright. However, it seems that Universal specifically was encouraging fans to create derivative works to promote the release of the movie. I would personally subpoena every document involving the viral campaign and look for language that I could use to prove a grant of license to the fans.
Disclaimer: I am not your attorney, I am most likely not even licensed to practice in your state. This is simply an academic discussion.
Battlestar Galactica fansites take notice!!!! (Score:4, Interesting)
The new Battlestar Galactica series is popular and has good ratings by cable standards, but not great ratings by new. The season premier got a 1.5 share. The CBS evening news pulls a 5, and CBS is embarrassed by the low rating. So there's some perspective.
Sci-Fi recently encouraged fans to "Make Galactica #1" with a spread the word campaign. Sound familiar? Kinda like what the Browncoats were encouraged to do?
Next year the marketing machine for Star Trek will ramp up to promote the new TOS based movie. Do you think they might reach out to the fans? Do you thing Paramont might be desperate for some old school Trekkie action? Perhaps it would be stupid for Paramont to sue fan sites, biting the hand and all that.
Universal hasn't learned this leason.
One word: estoppel (Score:5, Interesting)
Since Universal Pictures knew about the "infringing" activities and did nothing when those activities helped promote their film, their retroactive licensing fees should IMO be estopped. I don't know if Universal's cease and desist orders can be estopped or not. Since people built business models based upon Universal's tacit acceptance of the use of their trademarks, I think a good argument could be made that Universal delayed too long and have thus invalidated their own trademarks. If trademarks are not vigorously enforced, they are forfeited.
I had NEVER seen firefly til (Score:4, Interesting)
I went and bought Serenity, watched it, loved it and bought the entire DVD set of Firefly. Showed them to the Mrs., and she loves it too. Too bad it was underwritten by douchebags.
Summary makes no sense! (Score:3, Informative)
I hate what the Internet has done to basic language skills.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
This news is rather upsetting (Score:3, Funny)
Serenity Now!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Some people are just ... stupid. (Score:5, Interesting)
However this is missing the point of how viral marketing campaigns are supposed to work. Viral marketing can be scary particularly for large control-freak companies, as the essential point behind viral marketing is to give away control of the brand to the fans / early adopters and let them be a mouthpiece for your product, a voice that other fans and their less fanish friends, family and acquaintances will trust when they wouldn't even notice a conventional marketing campaign via TV, radio, print and billboards.
I wouldn't be surprised if Universal's marketing dept were over the moon with all the fan promotion including Serenity T-shirts (free advertising by the wearer). And at the same time their IP dept were doing the only thing they know how to do. Plenty of YouTube vids were posted by marketing depts only to be retracted by their own lawyeres.
It seems to me that part of the deal with viral marketing is giving away control to the fans and while this may be informal (how do you contract for that 20th C-style?) and the fan volunteers have a right to be treated with respect for their work. Even if that means they make a little money out of the owner's IP. Under the technicalities of the law that may be "unlicenced" use, but there is an implicit grant of rights in marketing a product that we consumers have let slide and given the corporations free rein to trample over. Otherwise every time we told a mate about a great product we'd have to pay a licence fee and balance that by billing the corporation for marketing services. Just as these Browncoats have tried to show...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)