Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Star Trek Discovery has “a Netflix original series” in its opening credits. They didn’t commission it, nor did they have any creative input. They’ve simply acquired exclusive rights to distribute it outside the USA.
|
None of us are privy to the contracts, but how do we know that without Netflix purchasing overseas rights to Discovery the project would even have been viable?
They may not have commissioned the show but their money probably helped bring it to our screens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheekyangus
I suspect the reason many people don't care, is simply because they don't know. Yes, there are many that would still probably shrug and move on if the issue was made clear, either because they either don't understand or don't care.
And even the creators may only be aware of how their show is marketed in their own country, again it's a case of them not knowing.
If the likes of Netflix and Amazon commission the show, I have no problem with the term Original, so long as it's not a joint commission. They have to be the sole commissioning party to use the term in my opinion. I wish they'd just use Exclusive.
I suppose part of the reason it is an issue for me is I'm currently working on multiple writing projects, and though many of them are intended to be books, I am looking at them from a TV/film adaptation standpoint as I go. And I know it would annoy me as the creator.
|
If one of your projects were to be picked up for TV or movie adaptation and as long as you were fully credited on screen and fully paid to all you would be entitled to would you have an objection if that adaptation was only a viable profitable project because overseas investors picked up the secondary rights and insisted on saying it was one of their originals where they were showing it?