King Kong Tribute Thread (THE REAL KING KONG!)

[Pkmatrix]

The current way the rights work is Kong the character and basic story are public domain but the name King Kong and the rights to make films are owned by Univeral (perhaps, the public domain NECA figure is called King Kong so maybe this has changed)

The original Kong going PD will not change any of this and that's considering WB might attempt to renew their copyright on it (as they own that incarnation thanks to buying Turner who bought it from RKO)

No one owns the exclusive rights to make films, because Kong and his story are public domain. It's like saying only Universal can make Frankenstein movies or only Disney could make Robin Hood movies. It's just incorrect.

Same with the trademark, as Universal v. Nintendo ruled that the term is just common vernacular so the name/character can't be trademarked (it'd be like trying to trademark the word "blue" or the concept of a blue sky). Everything I've read suggests it's not so much that Universal owns the name but more that nobody wants to bother risking Universal filing a frivolous lawsuit over it (as they have a history of doing) so anybody working with the character just sticks with "Kong" for the most part, but not universally. The Broadway musical, which in the little booklet they handed out to audiences cited the novel specifically as the source and how it was public domain, used the title "King Kong" without incident.

What Universal owns are all the rights and trademarks related to the Kong films they themselves have made or own, which I believe is specifically the 2005 movie and everything related to that, the U.S. rights to KKvG and King Kong Escapes, I think The King Kong Show, and whatever else was sold to them by the Coopers after the outcome of Cooper v. RKO.

As for the rights around the '33 movies: Warner Brothers cannot "renew" their copyright on those movies, because copyright renewal was eliminated as a thing in the United States in the 1970s. Unless they convince Congress to freeze the public domain again (unlikely, there are very big players committed to keeping the public domain open) then the original two movies will enter the public domain on January 1, 2029 and there is nothing Warner Brothers can do about it. In some circumstances copyright can be restored if a work lapsed into the public domain accidentally, which as it happens Kong does fall into that category, but even if they did that now it doesn't stop or delay Kong entering the public domain in 2029, that's a hard end date for the copyright terms of everything first published/released in 1933.

^I will like to ask another question : After the original Kong goes PD in 2029, does that mean the 1966 Kong cartoon will enter too? Rankin-Bass Productions has long-since closed its doors.

No, it will not. Whoever owns the copyright now (I believe it's Universal) will retain the copyright until it expires on January 1, 2062.

Every individual thing is copyrighted separately. This is why even though Kong and his story are public domain, you can't just make a Kong movie using the 1933 design - that design is owned by Warner Brothers, because the image is still copyrighted.

It's like how when Mickey Mouse enters the PD in a few years you won't be allowed to put Mickey in red shorts because the original cartoons were black and white so the color of the shorts remain copyrighted. You'll only be allowed to do so once the first color Mickey Mouse cartoon also enters the public domain which won't be until years after the first cartoon does so. Modern characters aren't 100% based on their first appearance, their copyrights are piecemeal spread out across decades and multiple works.

Added in 5 minutes 9 seconds:

I am guessing that even after 2029, NBC Universal will hold exclusive rights to make a new (King) Kong film and not just hold rights to pre-existing ones. It will probably remain that way until 2043, 70 years after the death of Merian C. Cooper.

What exclusive rights does Universal apparently have? The Wikipedia page states "Universal still retains the majority of the character rights" but doesn't clarify why this is the case (nor are there any referenced sources confirming this). If the original story and film characters are public domain (via the Lovelace novelization), then I can't imagine what rights Universal could lay claim to (except to their three Kong films).

The Wikipedia article is very poorly written and written misleadingly, as if to suggest the public domain status was somehow "revoked" and that Universal owns "most" of the rights in some way. Of course, the reality as confirmed by reading the actual rulings is that the outcome of Cooper v. RKO was separate from the outcome of Universal v. RKO and that the judge ruled the Cooper verdict didn't change the finding that Kong and his story are public domain, a ruling reaffirmed by Universal v. Nintendo a decade later.

As I said before: Universal only owns the rights related to the their own movies. That's it. No one anywhere holds exclusive rights to make Kong movies because Kong is public domain, end of story.

[SoggyNoodles2016]

Universal does NOT just own the 2005 Kong. Otherwise, why would there be a very public lawsuit between them and WB over making Kong: Skull Island? By your logic, WB should be in the right.

I looked into this further and you are correct that Universal doesn't have exclusive rights to Kong. However, Universal has FULL RIGHTS to all media uses of King Kong post the deal made in the purchase from the Cooper Estate in the 1980s, with only the literature and comic rights retained by the estate. This means that Universal does not own Kong as a character due to the name and character itself being public domain but they basically have complete say over what can and can't be made Kong wise.

Look at the last few years of Kong media if you don't believe that this is what the rights are

Kong: Skull Island? Deal with Universal.

Ready Player One? Clear deal with Universal given Rexy's cameo and the DeLorean.

GVK? Same as Skull Island.

Space Jam 2? Only the 33 Kong which WB still has rights to.

Universal has the movie rights. They don't own the character but for all intents and purposes, they do in the medium most of us want to see the character in.

[Pkmatrix]

Universal does NOT just own the 2005 Kong. Otherwise, why would there be a very public lawsuit between them and WB over making Kong: Skull Island? By your logic, WB should be in the right.

Lawsuit? What lawsuit? Please point to what you're referring to, because I'm not aware of any lawsuit. What I do recall are articles like this during the production of the movie:

King Kong On Move To Warner Bros, Presaging Godzilla Monster Matchup

Note that Deadline noted Kong's public domain status in the opening paragraph in the same sentence as pointing out Toho owns Godzilla. And this article from The Hollywood Reporter:

Hollywood Gorilla Warfare: It’s Universal vs. Legendary Over ‘Kong: Skull Island’ (and Who Says “Thank You”)

A quote from that second article:

Some industry insiders assumed King Kong was a Universal property, probably because of Peter Jackson‘s 2005 film and the theme park attraction, but the material is in the public domain.

I looked into this further and you are correct that Universal doesn't have exclusive rights to Kong. However, Universal has FULL RIGHTS to all media uses of King Kong post the deal made in the purchase from the Cooper Estate in the 1980s, with only the literature and comic rights retained by the estate. This means that Universal does not own Kong as a character due to the name and character itself being public domain but they basically have complete say over what can and can't be made Kong wise.

This is paraphrasing from Wikipedia, which as I pointed out before is inaccurate. Here's the text of final decision in Universal v. Nintendo:

Universal City Studios, Inc., Plaintiff-appellant, Cross-appellee, v. Nintendo Co., Ltd. and Nintendo of America, Inc.,defendants-appellees, Cross- Appellants, 797 F.2d 70 (2d Cir. 1986)

And here's the relevant portion so you don't have to go digging:

In 1975 a dispute had developed between Universal, RKO Radio Pictures, Inc. (RKO), and the Dino DiLaurentis Corporation (DDL), as to who could produce a remake of the film "King Kong." RKO had produced the original film in 1933, which was based upon a book by Merian C. Cooper, who also co-authored the screenplay. In 1975, RKO licensed DDL to produce a remake, a result that upset Universal, which claimed that it had been offered the license in negotiations.

In August 1975 Universal filed suit in federal court for the Central District of California seeking a declaratory judgment that the copyright on the King Kong story had lapsed, that the story was in the public domain, and that Universal could produce a remake without infringing the rights of RKO or DDL. Universal City Studios, Inc. v. RKO General Inc., et al., C.V. 75-3526-R (C.D. Cal. 1975). RKO counterclaimed asserting, among other things, that Universal had diluted its trademark in King Kong. At the conclusion of a four-day bench trial, Universal's regular outside trial counsel, Stephen Kroft, argued that King Kong could not be a trademark because it had no secondary meaning and was part of the ordinary English language.

On November 24, 1976, the district court found that the King Kong story, as embodied in the original novel, had become part of the public domain, and that RKO had a copyright only in "the copyrightable matter" which was contained in the 1933 movie but not in the original novel. Universal City Studios, Inc. v. RKO General, Inc., et al., C.V. 75-3526-R (C.D. Cal. Nov. 24, 1976) (Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law). The court found that Universal could make a movie based on King Kong as long as it did not infringe on the copyrightable scenes of the 1933 movie. Id.

The court denied relief on RKO's counterclaim alleging trademark dilution, adopting Universal's argument that there had been no such dilution and, further, that:

"1) There is no evidence that the title 'King Kong' has a secondary meaning by which the public [in 1976] indentifies such title with RKO or the motion picture.

2) The name 'King Kong' has become part of the ordinary English language."

Id. The court reduced these findings to a judgment (the RKO judgment)1 on November 24, 1976.

Richard Cooper, Merian's heir, was a defendant in the RKO litigation and had filed a cross-claim against RKO. On December 6, 1976, the court entered an interlocutory judgment which determined that Merian Cooper's agreement with RKO had given RKO the right only to produce the 1933 movie and the "Son of Kong" sequel. Richard Cooper v. RKO General, Inc., C.V. 75-3526-R (C.D. Cal. Dec. 6, 1976).

The district court later entered findings of fact and conclusions of law in conjunction with a final judgment (the Cooper judgment) on Richard Cooper's cross-claim. The court incorporated its previous findings from the interlocutory judgment and concluded that, as between RKO and Cooper, Cooper possessed all rights in the name, character and story of King Kong other than the rights in the 1933 movie and the sequel "Son of Kong." The court also found that RKO's license with DDL for the remake of King Kong, and its licenses with certain toy manufacturers, had breached RKO's original limited assignment from Merian Cooper. Therefore, RKO owed Richard Cooper the profits accrued from these breaches. The court consistently noted, however, that its determination of Richard Cooper's cross-claim did not affect any other person and did not affect its finding that the King Kong story was in the public domain.

It is clear from the above that Cooper did not hold any trademark rights against the world in King Kong. Any such rights that might exist would be solely against RKO.

After the entry of the Cooper judgment, Cooper assigned all of his rights in King Kong to Universal for $200,000. The primary value of the assignment, it appears, was Cooper's right to receive certain revenues DDL would pay to RKO under DDL's license to produce a King Kong remake. DDL released that remake in December 1976.

If you've found something that refutes this, please link because I'd love to read it.

Look at the last few years of Kong media if you don't believe that this is what the rights are

Kong: Skull Island? Deal with Universal.

Ready Player One? Clear deal with Universal given Rexy's cameo and the DeLorean.

GVK? Same as Skull Island.

Space Jam 2? Only the 33 Kong which WB still has rights to.

Universal has the movie rights. They don't own the character but for all intents and purposes, they do in the medium most of us want to see the character in.

The deal with Universal for K:SI was detailed in the articles I linked to earlier, and did not involve Universal granting any rights to Legendary. The deal was trading movie projects, and Universal having passed on the project didn't object because, as the articles from the time noted, the property is public domain. Legendary didn't need their permission for the character, they needed them to trade their stake in the movie so Warner Brothers could co-produce instead.

Ready Player One means nothing, because again there's a clear difference Kong - a public domain character Universal does not own - and the DeLorean, a copyrighted element of a movie they clearly own. Show me proof that Warner Brothers had asked Universal's permission to use Kong here and I'll relent.

The only point I agree on here is that the 33 Kong's appearance in Space Jam 2 is specifically because they own the rights to the 33 film. Including Kong isn't because of that, including Kong with that particularly character design is.

Universal does not own the movie rights, because no one can exclusively own the movie rights to a public domain character. That's just simply not how the public domain works.

[SoggyNoodles2016]

I humbly apologize, I was getting confused between the production troubles of moving Skull Island to Warner instead of the original producers Universal and when Joe Devito sued Legendary for stealing ideas from King Kong of Skull Island, his licensed prequel (I will say I have no source but DO remember industry leaks saying Universal was pissed about the deal and stonewalled it for a while). And you are right, I did make assumptions about RPO.

I don't have to find links because you proved my point yourself.

Cooper possessed all rights in the name, character and story of King Kong

Cooper assigned all of his rights in King Kong to Universal for $200,000

This sale means Universal owns King Kong. As I said earlier, the novelization and its serialization are public domain and specifically refer to the character as KONG. Universal owns King Kong as Cooper held it, which is the ability to make things that Cooper's Estate could license such as Kong merch, rides, movies and so on, with the exception of publishing rights. This Ghoulish Media article is my main source on this but its corroborated in other places.
https://ghoulishmedia.com/who-legally-owns-king-kong/)



My point here is not Universal owns exclusive rights of a public domain character and story, it is that the LION'S SHARE of the rights of what to do with Kong is under Universal legal. So, while WB, De Laurentis, Cooper and so many others do have their finger in the pot of Kong and again, he isn't legally trademarked, Universal does more or less have say on a lot of what has to do with Kong.

It's like making a Frankenstein movie. You can adapt the original story and make it no problem but you have to keep things in check because Universal owns a version of that monster.

Added in 2 minutes 57 seconds:
My argument isn't that Universal owns all versions of Kong, it's that Universal has more leeway with Kong then any other company right now

[Terasawa]

This Ghoulish Media article is my main source on this but its corroborated in other places.
https://ghoulishmedia.com/who-legally-owns-king-kong/)

Cooper discovered that RKO had licensed the character both for a series of consumer products and to Producer John Beck for a deal with Toho studios and Universal to make the 1962 classic King Kong Vs. Godzilla.

Cooper sought to stop the Toho-Universal co-production of King Kong vs. Godzilla from being released. He claimed to have a letter detailing how he had licensed the Kong rights to RKO for King Kong and Son of Kong and nothing else. According to Cooper, Universal’s hold on Kong was illegitimate. Unfortunately for Cooper and his legal team, these letters could not be found. He claimed that they had been stolen.

At the very least, this part of that article is incorrect, albeit not really in a way that disproves the author's argument. Universal (actually, then "Universal-International") did not co-produce KKvG or its Americanization. John Beck was an independent producer who brought the project and the Kong rights (which he had acquired a license to from RKO) to Toho and produced his own Americanization after the Japanese release. He then sold all of his rights to U-I.

Per Japan's Favorite Mon-Star:

The exact details of the deal between Toho, John Beck, and RKO are elusive, but several things about it are clear. The only money exchanged in the deal appears to have been paid by Toho to the Americans, not vice versa, for the studio had to scale back the production in order to afford its end of the bargain. "RKO had the rights [to Kong], and Toho leased the rights to the character, with a guarantee of 80 million yen [about $200,000]," actor Yu Fujiki told Stuart Galbraith IV in a 1996 interview.

Thus, John Beck apparently had no financial stake in the production of King Kong vs. Godzilla... On August 1, 1962, 10 days before the picture opened in Japan, Beck attended a private screening on the Toho Studios lot accompanied by two representatives of Warner Bros. Pictures who were interested in acquiring the theatrical distribution rights from Beck.

Toho was so eager to get King Kong that it not only paid for the character, it agreed to give John Beck the lucrative theatrical and television distribution rights to King Kong vs. Godzilla in the U.S., Canada, Alaska, the U.K., and Israel, while Toho retained the Far East rights. Beck also obtained permission to produce his own American version of the film via re-editing... Upon returning home to Hollywood, Beck continued to shop the picture to interested distributors and eventually sold it to his old cronies at Universal-International, as reported in Variety on April 29, 1963. Even though it had no involvement in the making of the film, Universal engineered a sweetheart deal under which it has retained copyrights to the U.S. version of King Kong vs. Godzilla... A similar deal was struck when Universal distributed King Kong Escapes in 1968.

And in fact, the reason Toho got involved in the first place was because Beck couldn't find an American investor for Obie's story.

The rights to use the Kong character in King Kong Escapes were courtesy RKO as well. Unlike KKvG, RKO is named in both Japanese and American releases of the later film.

The article also says, "The Cooper Estate still owns publishing rights to Kong and has partnered with different writers and artists over the years to create Kong-related books and comics. The De Laurentiis Company retains ownership over the 1976 remake and its 1986 cheapo sequel King Kong Lives. Universal owns whatever is not covered under those rights holders."

While the highlighted statement is true (at least as far as film properties go), it's paints a sort of distorted picture of Universal's ownership. They own the Toho Kong films (outside of Japan) thanks to two separate deals they made in the '60s with the American producers of those films. They also now own the animated King Kong Show through Classic Media (which acquired the series from Rankin/Bass in the 1990s). The author also seems to be operating under the false belief that copyright terms are 100 years in length. I'd say it's fair to call into question this article's accuracy.

[SoggyNoodles2016]

Yeah, I realized rereading. Thanks for the specifics though.

I officially rescind my argument but will say: God. Kong is a mess, no wonder it takes a decade between films.

[Terasawa]

Either previously in this thread or another like it, I also argued that Universal had film rights to the character. But then it hit me, too, that what rights Universal might have almost certainly can't have exclusive film rights.

I don't know if the Cooper decision has been fully clarified somewhere, but I think that might explain exactly what Universal got from the Cooper estate's sale. Otherwise, yep, "Kong is a mess."

I also didn't realize until typing my last post that Universal has the rights to three legally-related '60s Kong properties, but obtained their rights to those on three separate occasions. It's like they're destined to come into eventual ownership of any Kong project that passes through Toho or Rankin/Bass.

[Pkmatrix]

Yeah, I realized rereading. Thanks for the specifics though.

I officially rescind my argument but will say: God. Kong is a mess, no wonder it takes a decade between films.

You can say that again! I hope someone writes a book about all of this one of these days. ^_^

[John Pannozzi]

Ok, I want to point out this excerpt from the Wikipedia page for RKO Pictures ("Studio library" section):

RKO Pictures LLC is the owner of all the trademarks and logos connected with RKO Radio Pictures Inc., as well as the rights concerning stories, screenplays (including 800 to 900 unproduced scripts), remakes, sequels, and prequels connected with the RKO library.[219] The RKO Pictures television, video, and theatrical distribution rights, however, are in other hands: The U.S. and Canadian TV—and consequently, video—rights to most of the RKO film library were sold at auction in 1971 after the holders, TransBeacon (a corporate descendant of C&C Television), went bankrupt. The auctioned rights were split between United Artists and Marian B. Inc. (MBI). In 1984, MBI created a subsidiary, Marian Pictures Inc. (MBP), to which it transferred its share of the RKO rights. Two years later GenCorp's subsidiaries, RKO General and RKO Pictures, repurchased the rights then controlled by MBP. The original RKO Radio Pictures Inc copyrighted movies were assigned to RKO General Inc. which still holds the current copyrights.[220]

In the meantime, United Artists had been acquired by MGM. In 1986, MGM/UA's considerable library, including its RKO rights, was bought by Turner Broadcasting System for its new Turner Entertainment division. When Turner announced plans to colorize ten of the RKO films, GenCorp resisted, claiming copyright infringement, leading to both sides filing lawsuits.[221] During RKO Pictures' brief Wesray episode, Turner acquired many of the distribution rights that had returned to RKO via MBP, as well as both the theatrical rights and the TV rights originally held back from C&C for the cities where RKO owned stations.[222] The new owners of RKO also allowed Turner to move forward with colorization of the library.[223] Early in 1989, Turner declared that no less than the historic Citizen Kane would be colorized; upon review of Welles's ironclad creative contract with RKO, however, that plan was abandoned.[224] In October 1996, Turner Broadcasting was merged into Time Warner (now WarnerMedia), which now controls distribution of the bulk of the RKO library in North America, and recently the rest of the World.[225]

Ownership of the major European TV and video distribution rights to RKO's library is divided on a virtual country-by-country basis: In the UK, many of the RKO rights were held by Universal Studios until recently being reverted to Time Warner.[226] In 1981, RAI, the public broadcasting service, acquired the Italian rights to the RKO library, which it now shares with Silvio Berlusconi's Fininvest.[227] In France, the rights are held by Ariès.[228] The German rights were acquired in 1969 by KirchGruppe on behalf of its KirchMedia division, which went bankrupt in 2002.[229] EOS Entertainment's Beta Film purchased many of KirchMedia's rights in 2004, and the library is now distributed by Kineos, created in 2005 as a Beta Film–KirchMedia joint venture.[230] In Spain, the Spanish rights go to Filmax until 1997 and Manga Films (now known as Vertice 360) since 1997.

The Disney films originally distributed by RKO are owned and now fully controlled by The Walt Disney Company's distribution division,[231] as is the 1940 film adaptation of Swiss Family Robinson which Disney purchased prior to producing its own film adaptation. Rights to many other independent productions distributed by the studio, as well as some notable coproductions, are in new hands. Most Samuel Goldwyn films are owned by his estate and are administered by Warner Bros. in North America and Miramax internationally.[232] It's a Wonderful Life, coproduced by Frank Capra's Liberty Films,[233] and The Bells of St. Mary's, coproduced by Leo McCarey's Rainbow Productions,[234] are now owned by ViacomCBS, through its indirect acquisition of Republic Pictures, the former National Telefilm Associates.[235] Notorious, a coproduction between RKO and David Selznick's Vanguard Films, is now owned by ABC (under Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures)[236] while home video rights are currently controlled by The Criterion Collection.[237] The Stranger, from William Goetz's International Pictures, has been in the public domain since 1973.[238] Eighteen films produced by RKO itself in 1930–31, including Dixiana, were also allowed to fall into the public domain, as were several later in-house productions, including high-profile releases such as The Animal Kingdom, Bird of Paradise, Of Human Bondage, Love Affair, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, and They Knew What They Wanted.[239] In the late 1950s, Hughes bought his beloved Jet Pilot and The Conqueror back from RKO Teleradio; in 1979, Universal acquired the rights to the latter.[240]

Also, I want to point out that the original 1933 Kong film is in the Public Domain in Japan (it seems that most pre-1953 movies are PD in Japan).

[AllosaurHell]

About the cancelled The Legend of King Kong film, I recently made a poster on Photoshop featuring how I think it's weird neanderthal, man-ape Kong would look in the film. I post it here because I think it's fitting for the title of the thread, my tribute to an unmade and ambitious take on King Kong.

https://twitter.com/allosaurhell/status ... 56065?s=20

I sent it as a tweet because I have no other way of posting images here without them being blocked somehow.

[mikelcho]

Keep in mind that copyright and trademark are not the same thing as one may assume. Even if the rights to the original film lapse into the public domain in 2029, (King) Kong will still be a trademark of Universal. Same goes for Mickey Mouse after Steamboat Willie goes PD in 2024.

FWIW, there's already legal precedent for trademark not trumping copyright expiration: https://www.cartoonbrew.com/classic/who ... 37419.html

And like SoggyNoodles2016, Neca's PD Kong figure was called King Kong (as was their PD Kidrobot Kong plush).

^I will like to ask another question : After the original Kong goes PD in 2029, does that mean the 1966 Kong cartoon will enter too? Rankin-Bass Productions has long-since closed its doors.

Copyright doesn't work that way. The 1966 series is its own copyrighted work; it won't lose its copyright protection when the 1933 film enters public domain.

True. The 1960s Kong cartoon is currently owned by Comcast/NBCUniversal (via their acquisition of DreamWorks Animation and the Classic Media library).

Thanks, I was wondering who owned the series now after all this time.

Unfortunately, many of the episodes of this series are missing, so a complete-series home video release is out of the question, as least for now.

To find out more, go to Wikizilla's Mechani-Kong page and click on Discussion. There's a reference to an article on there that'll explain everything. I ought to know; I started the discussion.

[Pkmatrix]

Ok, I want to point out this excerpt from the Wikipedia page for RKO Pictures ("Studio library" section):

RKO Pictures LLC is the owner of all the trademarks and logos connected with RKO Radio Pictures Inc., as well as the rights concerning stories, screenplays (including 800 to 900 unproduced scripts), remakes, sequels, and prequels connected with the RKO library.[219] The RKO Pictures television, video, and theatrical distribution rights, however, are in other hands: The U.S. and Canadian TV—and consequently, video—rights to most of the RKO film library were sold at auction in 1971 after the holders, TransBeacon (a corporate descendant of C&C Television), went bankrupt. The auctioned rights were split between United Artists and Marian B. Inc. (MBI). In 1984, MBI created a subsidiary, Marian Pictures Inc. (MBP), to which it transferred its share of the RKO rights. Two years later GenCorp's subsidiaries, RKO General and RKO Pictures, repurchased the rights then controlled by MBP. The original RKO Radio Pictures Inc copyrighted movies were assigned to RKO General Inc. which still holds the current copyrights.[220]

In the meantime, United Artists had been acquired by MGM. In 1986, MGM/UA's considerable library, including its RKO rights, was bought by Turner Broadcasting System for its new Turner Entertainment division. When Turner announced plans to colorize ten of the RKO films, GenCorp resisted, claiming copyright infringement, leading to both sides filing lawsuits.[221] During RKO Pictures' brief Wesray episode, Turner acquired many of the distribution rights that had returned to RKO via MBP, as well as both the theatrical rights and the TV rights originally held back from C&C for the cities where RKO owned stations.[222] The new owners of RKO also allowed Turner to move forward with colorization of the library.[223] Early in 1989, Turner declared that no less than the historic Citizen Kane would be colorized; upon review of Welles's ironclad creative contract with RKO, however, that plan was abandoned.[224] In October 1996, Turner Broadcasting was merged into Time Warner (now WarnerMedia), which now controls distribution of the bulk of the RKO library in North America, and recently the rest of the World.[225]

Ownership of the major European TV and video distribution rights to RKO's library is divided on a virtual country-by-country basis: In the UK, many of the RKO rights were held by Universal Studios until recently being reverted to Time Warner.[226] In 1981, RAI, the public broadcasting service, acquired the Italian rights to the RKO library, which it now shares with Silvio Berlusconi's Fininvest.[227] In France, the rights are held by Ariès.[228] The German rights were acquired in 1969 by KirchGruppe on behalf of its KirchMedia division, which went bankrupt in 2002.[229] EOS Entertainment's Beta Film purchased many of KirchMedia's rights in 2004, and the library is now distributed by Kineos, created in 2005 as a Beta Film–KirchMedia joint venture.[230] In Spain, the Spanish rights go to Filmax until 1997 and Manga Films (now known as Vertice 360) since 1997.

The Disney films originally distributed by RKO are owned and now fully controlled by The Walt Disney Company's distribution division,[231] as is the 1940 film adaptation of Swiss Family Robinson which Disney purchased prior to producing its own film adaptation. Rights to many other independent productions distributed by the studio, as well as some notable coproductions, are in new hands. Most Samuel Goldwyn films are owned by his estate and are administered by Warner Bros. in North America and Miramax internationally.[232] It's a Wonderful Life, coproduced by Frank Capra's Liberty Films,[233] and The Bells of St. Mary's, coproduced by Leo McCarey's Rainbow Productions,[234] are now owned by ViacomCBS, through its indirect acquisition of Republic Pictures, the former National Telefilm Associates.[235] Notorious, a coproduction between RKO and David Selznick's Vanguard Films, is now owned by ABC (under Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures)[236] while home video rights are currently controlled by The Criterion Collection.[237] The Stranger, from William Goetz's International Pictures, has been in the public domain since 1973.[238] Eighteen films produced by RKO itself in 1930–31, including Dixiana, were also allowed to fall into the public domain, as were several later in-house productions, including high-profile releases such as The Animal Kingdom, Bird of Paradise, Of Human Bondage, Love Affair, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, and They Knew What They Wanted.[239] In the late 1950s, Hughes bought his beloved Jet Pilot and The Conqueror back from RKO Teleradio; in 1979, Universal acquired the rights to the latter.[240]

Also, I want to point out that the original 1933 Kong film is in the Public Domain in Japan (it seems that most pre-1953 movies are PD in Japan).

Yeah, RKO got eviscerated...I was very much stunned to find out a few years ago that they're actually still around!

[Legendary Gojira]

Interesting bit of info popping up about the 1998 Stephen Sommers' sea monster flick, DEEP RISING and the Eighth Wonder of the World as of late. Apparently, Disney was looking at doing their own take on King Kong. And as fans of Deep Rising may remember about the flick's ending. The survivors of the Argonautica make their way to an island after blowing up the ship, and monstrous sea creature terrorizing them. And just as things are settling down, they hear the roar of some massive beast. The story goes that roar was from none other than King Kong himself, and Finnegan, Joey, and Trillian had landed on none other than Skull Island. Deep Rising was supposedly intended from the scuttlebutt to a back door prequel to a Disney produced KING KONG. Although I have doubts to this story seeing that Universal was already working with Peter Jackson on his take for Kong. And Universal had quite the iron grip on Kong's rights, and even Disney couldn't pry them loose at the time. But the rumor fits in with the location of the sea monster flick's parting shot.

Well, damn, I didn't know this. Never got around to watching Deep Rising back in the day, but just might have to watch it now.

[Vakanai]

Interesting bit of info popping up about the 1998 Stephen Sommers' sea monster flick, DEEP RISING and the Eighth Wonder of the World as of late. Apparently, Disney was looking at doing their own take on King Kong. And as fans of Deep Rising may remember about the flick's ending. The survivors of the Argonautica make their way to an island after blowing up the ship, and monstrous sea creature terrorizing them. And just as things are settling down, they hear the roar of some massive beast. The story goes that roar was from none other than King Kong himself, and Finnegan, Joey, and Trillian had landed on none other than Skull Island. Deep Rising was supposedly intended from the scuttlebutt to a back door prequel to a Disney produced KING KONG. Although I have doubts to this story seeing that Universal was already working with Peter Jackson on his take for Kong. And Universal had quite the iron grip on Kong's rights, and even Disney couldn't pry them loose at the time. But the rumor fits in with the location of the sea monster flick's parting shot.

Well, damn, I didn't know this. Never got around to watching Deep Rising back in the day, but just might have to watch it now.

I don't for a moment believe the rumor it was a failed backdoor film to a King Kong film, but I can still highly recommend checking it out - it's a good monster movie, a bit gory, and it stars Famke Janssen. I will always recommend staring at Famke Janssen on screen as good time spent for any eyeballs.

[LegendZilla]

Here's how things work when copyright expires for an IP. if the property is owned by a single author and their family estate, the longevity for copyright is 70 years. However, for corporate ownership, it is 95 years as of today. Once any work of fiction and the characters it inhabits enters the public domain, you can't do something with it willy-nilly. You will only be allowed to use the work as it was originally presented at the time of its debut. For example, when Steamboat Willie and the other classic Mickey shorts from around that era enter the PD in 2023-24, you only be allowed to use Mickey as he was presented in said shorts. When Superman first debuted in 1938, he did not have his signature S medallion on his chest, but rather a generic S placed on top of a triangle. He could not fly or shoot eye-lasers until later on. By now I'm guessing you get were I'm going.

That would mean that when the original 1933 Kong goes PD in 2029, anyone can use (King) Kong as long as he looks like this :



I am guessing that not even Toho will be able make their own version of Kong again, at least until 70 years after the death of Merian C. Cooper. Boy copyright can be a hassle.

[eabaker]

I think you've slightly misunderstood. It's not that you can't create your own variations at that point; it's that you can't use specific elements introduced in later versions which are still under copyright. Toho would still be free to create their own version of Kong, but nobody else would be free to use Toho's 1962 design until that film enters public domain.

[Mr. Yellow]

How much of,this is covered in John's Kong books?

[LegendZilla]

How much of this is covered in John's Kong books?

Who's John?

[mikelcho]

How much of this is covered in John's Kong books?

Who's John?

John LeMay. He wrote a book (one of many) called Kong Unmade: The Lost Films of Skull Island.

[Pkmatrix]

How much of this is covered in John's Kong books?

Who's John?

John LeMay. He wrote a book (one of many) called Kong Unmade: The Lost Films of Skull Island.

It's covered a bit in Kong Unmade, in the chapter about The Legend of Kong.