Olivia de Havilland is 101 and sues FOX over TV series FEUD!

Post news stories and home video release announcements here.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

wich2

  • Posts: 1268
  • Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 11:11 am

Re: Olivia de Havilland is 101 and sues FOX over TV series F

PostTue Jul 11, 2017 8:59 pm

'Welcome.

The H.G. Wells character, in TIME AFTER TIME:

"Every age is the same. It's only love that makes any of them bearable."
Offline
User avatar

maliejandra

  • Posts: 371
  • Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:32 pm

Re: Olivia de Havilland is 101 and sues FOX over TV series F

PostWed Jul 12, 2017 5:46 am

bigshot wrote:Fatty Arbuckle sure didn't think the 1920s were so great. And the people in the bread lines in the early 30s would have liked to be anywhere but there.


Minorities probably felt much the same way.

We tend to look at the past through rose colored glasses and ignore the negative things about the times, which is a benefit of being so far removed from them. People often tell me I was born in the wrong era, but would I truly like to go back to a time when women were second class citizens? Heck no!
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1061
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: Olivia de Havilland is 101 and sues FOX over TV series F

PostWed Jul 12, 2017 8:02 am

In old days man were only "fine class citizens" if they have a cristian believe, patriotic blindness, marriage to get respect in front a hypocrit societ and at same time had to prove virility etc...
Women could get high social ascenssion by marriage, and didn't go to war, were not called lesbian if decide not marry, but for other side have not rights as man.

Women today have rights, but since childhood suffer a cerebral washing from media in order to became erotic and histeric, to feel they need consume more and more to be happy. Women rights must exist, it's logic, but cerebral washing it's often masked as female emancipation.

I see that today people are slaves too, but in dissimulated way. Most don't even realise. It's more a brain slavery...
People consume too much, and the banks ger richer and richer.

maliejandra wrote:
bigshot wrote:Fatty Arbuckle sure didn't think the 1920s were so great. And the people in the bread lines in the early 30s would have liked to be anywhere but there.


Minorities probably felt much the same way.

We tend to look at the past through rose colored glasses and ignore the negative things about the times, which is a benefit of being so far removed from them. People often tell me I was born in the wrong era, but would I truly like to go back to a time when women were second class citizens? Heck no!
Keep thinking...

Image
Offline
User avatar

Frederica

  • Posts: 4797
  • Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 1:00 pm
  • Location: Kowea Town, Los Angeles

Re: Olivia de Havilland is 101 and sues FOX over TV series F

PostWed Jul 12, 2017 11:03 am

Jim Roots wrote:
Donald Binks wrote:Now, if you will excuse me, I am going back to 1929. I feel a lot more comfortable there. :D


What stocks have you invested in?

Jim


Antibiotics. Birth control. Public health.
Fred
"Every revelation you make is an illusion; so far, no one has succeeded in knowing you. Your white pumps literally go with any outfit."
Kim Kierkegaardashian
http://www.nitanaldi.com"
http://www.facebook.com/NitaNaldiSilentVamp"
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1061
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: Olivia de Havilland is 101 and sues FOX over TV series F

PostWed Jul 12, 2017 11:20 am

Public Health...
Despite the advances we still have millions of people suffering. Medicine science gave more years of life, but also gave a lot more of invalid years to live, live with pain, disabled etc...

Diabetes it's very high today, depression it's the higher in history... Tuberculosis is coming back stronger, and a super gonorrhea already exist.

But most people of today if went to 20's or 30's would suffer from "digital abistinence syndrome". no TV, no emails, no image banks, no facebook, no cell phone games. :lol:
Keep thinking...

Image
Offline
User avatar

George O'Brien

  • Posts: 517
  • Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:10 pm
  • Location: An Atoll in the Pacific

Re: Olivia de Havilland is 101 and sues FOX over TV series F

PostThu Jul 13, 2017 4:08 pm

Blah, blah, blah, ... ad nauseam.

Olivia is suing because she is the ONLY one who can.

Joan Crawford, Bette Davis, even their extremely lucrative estates, cannot sue. The women are dead.

According to the sickening man made laws of our courts anything false can be said about a dead person.

Olivia is very much alive. Olivia can sue. And I say, God bless her.
"This bar of likker is now a bar of justice!"
Offline
User avatar

Jim Roots

  • Posts: 2319
  • Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 2:45 pm
  • Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Olivia de Havilland is 101 and sues FOX over TV series F

PostThu Jul 13, 2017 9:14 pm

Frederica wrote:
Jim Roots wrote:
Donald Binks wrote:Now, if you will excuse me, I am going back to 1929. I feel a lot more comfortable there. :D


What stocks have you invested in?

Jim


Antibiotics. Birth control. Public health.


Excuse me for a minute, I have to go borrow some money from the Bank of Binks.

Jim
Offline
User avatar

Harlowgold

  • Posts: 366
  • Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 11:06 pm

Re: Olivia de Havilland is Wanted Dead or Alive

PostTue Jul 18, 2017 11:37 pm

JFK wrote:
And depicting her giving gossipy interviews to the press isn't something that will damage her career. As for the comments about her sister, that stuff is common knowledge. She can't pretend it didn't exist. Not a chance on this lawsuit
From the Hollywood Reporter
"She's suing for infringement of common law right of publicity, invasion of privacy and unjust enrichment and is asking the court for not only damages but also any profits gained from the use of her likeness and an injunction to keep FX from continuing to use her name and likeness."


How can de Havilland- or more likely, her estate- not win something in a settlement if the studio used her character without payment or permission? When filmmakers obtain neither, they generally substitute a fictitious/composite persona. One of their mistakes may have been not doing so here.

And, as always, I'll go further: if copyright laws can grant protection for 95 years or so, why shouldn't this protection length be granted to the right of publicity of deceased celebrities? Let's say in the year 2112 there is still a market for GWTW "Melanie" dolls, or "Snake Pit" action figures- shouldn't her estate, even at that late date, be able to win damages if the manufacturing of the dolls, if not the action figures, is decreased by false portrayals of Olivia as a gossip?


Olivia of course does have the right to control her image when used on new commercial products - about twenty years ago she declined to give her approval for the "non sports card" collector's card set issued on GWTW which resulted in not one photograph of "Melanie" on any of the 110 cards in the series. Her estate will still have the right to block similiar licensing after her death.

I was surprised with the decision to use her as a character in this Feud travesty especially given it's quite a stretch to claim she was any sort of an intimate with Crawford and perhaps even Davis (yes they were publicized as pals and did along well but really how much socializing was there, especially with Olivia far from the Hollywood scene by the early 50's) while every other star was dead and buried and Ryan Murphy could put out speculation and conjecture to his heart's content on them. I'm not surprised Olivia has spoken out and expressed her disapproval, this is the gal who took on Jack Warner, she certainly won't be a pushover for Fox and Murphy, even at 101.
Offline
User avatar

bigshot

  • Posts: 766
  • Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:59 pm

Re: Olivia de Havilland is 101 and sues FOX over TV series F

PostWed Jul 19, 2017 10:56 am

Merchandising rights are different than using a public figure in a film.
Previous

Return to Talkie News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Rick Lanham and 7 guests