Forum - View topicNEWS: Bandai Entertainment Clarifies Status of Its Sola License
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
bayoab
Posts: 831 |
|
|||
It is highly unlikely that neo-ADV paid something substantial for this license as it was in a package deal to begin with. |
||||
|
||||
agila61
 Posts: 3213 Location: NE Ohio |
|
|||
Or its part of a package with the terms that each item in the package has to be released. You wouldn't want to license something on a pure royalty deal and then have no product out there to generate royalties, would you? On the one hand, if one of the titles in the package gets picked by AnimeNetwork, it'll get a dub ... on the other hand, if one of the titles in the package gets a deal to help it get a dub, it'll get on AnimeNetwork. |
||||
|
||||
|
dragonrider_cody
Posts: 2541 |
|
|||
That's not true. Anime Network is currently running several shows that are subtitled, including Glass Mask, Neo Angelque Abyss, and Tears to Tiara. Not to mention, it has run subtitled shows including Ghost Hound, Blue Drop, and many others. |
||||
|
||||
Sam Murai
 Posts: 1051 |
|
|||
|
ROR...wut?!
None of this makes a whole lot of sense. How can a licensor grant an R1 distributor a title that is still under another's jurisdiction? I imagine maybe GENCO thought BEI's expired or flat-out didn't know and gave it to S23, instead. I don't see Bandai Visual being behind this for obvious reasons, but if so, I don't know what that speaks more of: BEI or the inter-relationships in Bandai-corporate. Right now, it feels like someone in Japan made a screw-up and I still wonder about Shigofumi's status, which, like sola and true tears, had a murky distro here. Those contracts must have really been something... All of this aside, BEI seems to have the upper-hand with the better prices and availablity. But hey, it should at least be interesting to witness two different companies release the same show and see who puts out the better product  .
|
||||
|
||||
|
Kimani
Posts: 43 |
|
|||
|
For what it's worth Sola was removed from my Netflix Queue this morning.
|
||||
|
||||
Teriyaki Terrier
 Posts: 5689 |
|
|||
I probably would do the same thing and I've removed several disks myself that I had a feeling would either never become available or I just lost interest in. Knowing Bandai and Sentai, I really wouldn't put much faith into a English audio track being placed in this series. If Kannagi, Gintama, Your Under Arrest etc wasn't dubbed (and they are fairly recent shows) I am pretty sure this show will be subtitle only. |
||||
|
||||
|
Kimani
Posts: 43 |
|
|||
I should have clarified, that Netflix themselves removed SOLA from my queue. |
||||
|
||||
|
ConanSan
Posts: 1818 |
|
|||
|
The correct response to this situation is to point at section 23 and say "Zombie ADV goasts leave this place!"
|
||||
|
||||
|
agila61
Posts: 3213 Location: NE Ohio |
|
|||
They can if the original licensor either never had exclusive rights or the exclusive rights lapsed. Second question: how can the original licensor keep distributing if its exclusive rights lapsed? It can if it retained the rights to distribute. There's nothing in the copyright law itself that makes the rights either one or the other ... its only in the contracts that tend to be drawn up. So different contract terms would permit different outcomes than the ones we are used to. |
||||
|
||||
|
agila61
Posts: 3213 Location: NE Ohio |
|
|||
Yeah, I said that in black and white terms and left out the shades of gray. If one of the titles in the packages gets picked by AnimeNetwork, its more likely to get a dub, and if one of the titles in the package gets a deal to help it get a dub, it'll get on AnimeNetwork. |
||||
|
||||
TheTheory
 Posts: 1029 Location: Central PA |
|
|||
|
this whole situation is getting completely chaotic. love it! Now if only we can get Sentai to comment that they are the sole license holders for Sola. Then the fireworks will really start!
|
||||
|
||||
|
agila61
Posts: 3213 Location: NE Ohio |
|
|||
In the announcement on one side, and in the "clarification" on the other, there was no claim either way of being the sole license holder, and no "counter-clarification" has come out saying that an exclusive license was picked up. So to this point, a situation of non-exclusive rights is at least plausible. Of course, while we might want a detailed explanation, its often not in the interests of firms engaged in negotiating licenses to release the full details of the terms that copyright owners were able to get ... Bandai obviously thought through what explanation was in its best interest to give, and the result was as clear as mud. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group