• Attn: If you were on the old forum, you may have to reset your password!

QUESTION....

russellsuthern

russellsuthern

Active member
Here's a question....wonder if anyone knows the answer...

All the episodes of original Who are on IPlayer, except the very 1st adventure, "An Unearthly Child."

I tried to find out why, but could only find out that it was for "copyright reasons..."

Surely, if anyone owns the copyright for the very 1st episode of Dr Who, you'd think it would be the BBC!

So, if it isn't the BEEB, who the hell is it? And, whoever they are, surely you'd think they'd be gracious enough to let the BBC put it on IPlayer for the 60th anniversary...

Also, if the BBC don't own the copyright to it, how come they were able to release it on DVD?!

"AAARRGGHH!!! I can't stand the confusion in my mind!!!"


Anyway, if anyone can help, i'd be grateful..... :)

Cheers,

Russell
 
As I understand it: The son of the guy who wrote the first story is claiming he has copyright claim to not just that story, but also the creation of the Tardis. This is nonsense because all the elements such as characters and the Tardis were established before any stories were commissioned. But as the guy pulled this at the last minute, rather than hold off while lengthy legal wrangling happens, the BBC just put everything except An Unearthly Child up.
General consensus is the guy is pretty much a troll who hates the show and he has tweeted (Xitted?) some very negative stuff about recent Who, making nasty (racist/transphobic) comments about the casting of Ncuti Gatwa and Yasmin Finney
 
The BBC actually owns very little in the way of copyright on Dr Who. The theme tune is Warner Chappell, Daleks, Cybermen Terry Nation Kit Peddler etc. Robert Homes owns his creations etc Sontarans and Most companions belong to the writers. Its a very thorny subject.
The Beeb owns The Doctor, the Tardis dematerialisation sounds and console room designs as they were made by BBC staff I believe.
Thos is why the Rani isnt used and why there are unnoficial spin-offs
 
I will buy Angelus Lupus' explanation.  It seems to fit, given the context, but I will comment that Intellectual Property (IP) law is very tricky. 

The example I will use is writing, since that's what I'm most familiar with--and have an example of:  If you write something, you can sell a publisher all the rights (the publisher now owns it), you can sell first rights (they get to publish it the first time but you retain the rights), you can have rights to different formats--serialization in Olden Dayes, magazine vs book, etc.  There's more.  American writer Hunter S. Thompson did this a lot.  Back in 1980, he wrote an article on the Hawaii Marathon for "Running" magazine.  Then he expanded that material for a book called "The Curse of Lono" that was released in 1983.  And in the early 2000s, he had a blog for...ESPN?, where he dragged out his Hawaii Marathon material for a post.  He made money off the same material at least 3 different ways because of how he managed his IP rights. 

This is part of why shows come up on a streaming channel for a bit and then go away again--someone else has broadcast rights or physical media distribution (DVD, VCR, etc) rights or some other rights. 

I know the BBC has had some wrinkles regarding IP with Terry Nation and the Daleks and there are probably other instances, but it doesn't sound like the case in this regard. 

Off topic, at one point I looked into being an IP lawyer, but I talked to at least a half dozen lawyer friends and acquaintances and they all told me circa 2015 was a terrible time to go to law school. 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top