Forum - View topicNEWS: Bandai Entertainment to Continue to Distribute Sola
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
ConanSan
Posts: 1818 |
|
|||||
|
Man, last time something like this happened, we got Machine Robo: Revenge of Cronos. Now all we get is disappointed at Zombie ADV,
|
||||||
|
||||||
Kalessin
 Posts: 931 |
|
|||||
|
Well, if Sentai Filmworks really didn't realize that Bandai already had the license, that would explain why they were going to sell it for a higher price. They were basing it on their own pricing scheme rather than trying to compete with Bandai's release in any way.
It is a bit odd that this managed to get far enough that the show was licensed twice, but if you didn't realize that another studio had a particular license and the licensor is trying to get you to license it (especially if it's part of a package deal), then you're not likely to think that someone else already has it. It does indicate a lack of research on their part though, since it wouldn't be hard to stumble on the fact that Bandai already released it. But that may just indicate that the license came as a package deal and it was one of the other licenses that they actually cared about or that they thought that Bandai had lost the license. After all, if the licensor says that it hasn't been licensed, they're the ones who should know. So, odds are that someone working for the Japanese licensor screwed up and thought that Sola wasn't licensed. I suppose that the error could be on Sentai's side, but I rather doubt it. That would be a far larger error to accidentally have it in your records that you've licensed a show that you have nothing to do with. I have a hard time believing that that's what happened. So, it's likely the Japanese licensor who screwed up. It probably happened because Bandai used to have Shigofumi as well. |
||||||
|
||||||
Emerje
 Posts: 7338 Location: Maine |
|
|||||
I'm not stupid you know. Check the change history, it didn't appear in the article until around 2 minutes after I made my post. 
Emerje |
||||||
|
||||||
keikanki
 Posts: 107 |
|
|||||
This may not be the first time this has happened to an ADV-affiliated company in recent years, and it may not be the error that's gone the farthest. Last year ADV's Happy Carrot label released the hentai series Legend of Lyon Flare: Into The Erogenous Zone on DVD for what they announced was "the first time ever in North America," that is, at least, until Chris Beveridge over at AOD pointed out that the title had previously been licensed by Media Blasters/Kitty Media and been released as recently as 2002 as Legend of Reyon... |
||||||
|
||||||
agila61
 Posts: 3213 Location: NE Ohio |
|
|||||
The individual companies do not spend all the waking hours of each day focusing on what the other companies are doing. If the rights owner is offering it, its easy to assume that the license has reverted after one or the other Bandai failed to exercise an option to renew. Actually, one possible clerical error would be entering an incorrect option date. If the contract says one thing and the database another, the map does not match the terrain. "Oh, wait a minute, this option was never exercised, this right is also available", when what should have been a 2018 has been entered as a 2008 (for example). |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Kalessin
Posts: 931 |
|
|||||
Well, I was thinking that an R1 anime company would normally do some research into the show before it licensed it to determine whether it was worth licensing and that that sort of research would stand a good chance of uncovering the fact that it had already been licensed (even if that information wasn't what they were looking for), which might raise some questions. I certainly wouldn't have expected them to specifically research whether another company already had the license. The licensor should know that. And isn't all that hard to see how a clerical error on the licensor's side could cause such an issue (your example showing just one of the fairly straightforward ways for it to happen). So, this is likely primarily a mistake on the licensor's part rather than Sentai. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Reaper gI
Posts: 299 Location: UK |
|
|||||
Bandai Visual are the Licesee Sentai are the licesor. It's Bandai Visual who have screwed up, they've potentialy broken their contract with Bandai Ent by licenceing this to Sentai. Sentai have been polite and taken a refund (I assume) rather than have Bandai Ent atempt to sue them, show them that they have vaild licence and then Bandai Ent sue Bandai Visual for breach of contract. Which would cost all of them lots of legal fees. |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group