is this true ( Dukes lawsuit )

[dukesran1]

I usely dont leasin to gossup but if this one is true wow i have read on a few site that the movie will not be showed

[Capt_Redneck]

I have no idea t otwhat you are talking about. Provide a link to what you read ......

[jllybn]

From what I've read, and correct me if I'm wrong, but a judge issued a temporary injunction saying that Warner Bros. could not release "The Dukes of Hazzard" movie due to a conflict with a producer associated with "Moonrunners". However, I have also read that the matter has since been settled. Please, correct me if I got any of the details wrong.

[Capt_Redneck]

Where is this info? .........Links please

[jllybn]

double post

[Capt_Redneck]

Where have you read that??? Please provide a link to reference it......

[dukesran1]

I read the rumors on IMDb if it was settled then it's just a rumor i brought you this becuase it was news to me.

here the address to the story

http://img276.echo.cx/img276/8828/screenshot7ar.jpg

[Brian Coltrane]

That link was funky, but I dug around and found the original article. It's true there was a suit and that it was settled. Here's the dirt:

Inside Move: WB avoids legal 'Hazzard'

"Dukes' flees court case

For a little while, at least, a federal judge told Warner Bros. to cancel the release of "The Dukes of Hazzard" and impound any copies of the film.

Preliminary injunction was issued last Friday in a suit brought by producer Robert B. Clark. Warners bought TV rights to his obscure 1975 film "Moonrunners" when the studio originally made the "Hazzard" TV skein.

Clark alleged nothing in the original 1978 contract gave Warners the right to also make a movie. In issuing such a far-reaching order, Judge Gary Allen Feess agreed.

"Plaintiffs have shown a likelihood that they will be able to prove at trial that they have an ownership interest in 'The Dukes of Hazzard' film," Feess wrote.

Suit has since been settled, but legal sources not involved in the case said Warners likely paid a pretty penny to settle.

Marc Toberoff, who represented the plaintiffs, said, "The parties have reached a settlement of all claims in the litigation. The terms of that settlement are confidential."

Warners spokeswoman Stacy Ivers said, "The suit has been settled."

In his decision, Feess directed pointed comments at the Warners legal department. Studio had claimed that the plaintiffs had waited too long before filing their lawsuit. "The Court," Feess wrote, "finds it a little ironic that Warner Bros., with a staff of lawyers and possession of voluminous materials specifically describing the limitations on the rights it obtained in 'The Moonrunners,' complains that the writers who were cut out of the current project should have given earlier notice of their copyright claim."

Date in print: Fri., Jun. 24, 2005, Los Angeles

[dukesran1]

Thanks Brian for the hole articlly i'm glad they settled

[Dale The Bold]

Wow, WB seems to have a continuously growing list of bad legal moves when it comes to the Dukes.

[Brian Coltrane]

Yeah, ain't it the truth? They're too paranoid to show the rebel flag in any poster or official online thing, for fear of offending somebody, but they don't mind sneakin' around a contract. Ya figure they'd check the fine print on this stuff before tryin' to put together a movie. Gee, OOPS!!

The legal defense they attempted is nothin' short of a Hogg tactic. They think the plantiff shoulda sued earlier ? What the hell.

If I was the plantiff, I woulda had my attorneys all lined up...and I woulda waited until after the movie had ran full box office circulation and was well on it's way to DVD, and had racked up millions. Then, I woulda dusted off my copy of the contract and said, "Oh, lookie heah. My oh my, looks like I do have a stake in this revenue. See ya in court, Warner Boys!"

I'm sure they covered that revenue sharing in the settlement, though. Probably worked it out to fifty percent of fifty percent of fifty percent.

Brian

[Capt_Redneck]

Brian - Thank you fro the info. What would we do around here without you. My apologies for getting on the others in this thread..

You would think they (WB) would have secured the rights back in 79 to 85 when the show was on the air. Wasn't there a legal action back then against the show too? I might be mistaken on that.

Definately the best thing to do would have been to wait to after the movie had made it's money at the box office and DVD sales. Unfortunately now , WB has a chance to actually limit the release and potentially work the numbers in there favor unless they settled for a flat fee. But is was settle rather quickly.

Funny how this only came out as a little "studio briefing" . No mention of a lawsuit earlier before it went to a judge. No other mentions on entertainment news sites or anything else. Well at least not yet anyway.

[Brian Coltrane]

You're welcome, Cap'n. Actually, credit goes to dukesran1 for bringing the issue up. This article was pretty well buried, and I have a feeling WB was doing it's best to keep it out of circulation. It's also possible that media silence by the plaintiff is a part of the settlement, so this may be the only tidbit to be found.

I would reveal the exact media source that supplied the article, but I don't want to get 'em in trouble, in case such a gag order exists.

What's interesting to ponder, is what the creator/writer of Moonrunners gets out of all this, if anything. ( Who was Gy Waldron. Creative input was also given by Jerry Rushing.) The suit was brought to court by the producer of the Moonrunners movie, Robert (Bob) Clark. I'm not sure how the legal ownership of Moonrunners breaks down between those three gentlemen, so I've no idea if Waldron and Rushing are happy men at the moment.

Just for kicks, here's some history from 1975:

"Made for just $360,000.00, Moonrunners earned approximately eight million. Waldron and Clark were able to reimburse their investors, but did not receive any of the box-office profits."

Brian