King Kong Tribute Thread (THE REAL KING KONG!)

[Angilasman]

^ I thought the Broadway show was done with the blessing of the Cooper Estate like the DeVito books?

[Mr. Yellow]

There's more minutia in there when you try to boil it down to specific characters and versions of said characters.

[LegendZilla]

I've gone off at length about it, you can read about it pages back lol

But in summary: no, your understanding is inaccurate.

The actual character himself and the original core story are Public Domain. This was the outcome of Universal v. RKO and Cooper v. RKO in the 1970s, a pair of US Federal Court cases filed over the production of the 1976 film.

In Universal v. RKO, it was ruled that due to how US copyright law worked at the time that, legally, the novelization of the original movie by Delos Lovelace published in 1932 is the source material for the 1933 movie and, legally, the movie is an adaptation of the novel. This is due to the 1932 novel being copyrighted first, and therefore being legally the original work that Kong and his story first appears in. At the time, after 28 years the copyright holder (Cooper) needed to file a formal renewal with the US Copyright Office which he failed to do. Because of this, the novel entered the public domain. When a work enters the public domain, all elements of that work enter the public domain as well and it becomes available for derivative works to be freely created. Thus, Kong and his story as depicted in the novel are public domain and free to use by anyone without licensing.

In Cooper v. RKO, it was ruled that Merian C. Cooper had only ever granted RKO a license to produce and distribute the original two 1933 films and nothing else as he had always asserted, and that all licensing and merchandising done by RKO since was fraudulent. RKO was ordered hand over all of it (toy deals, the licensing agreement with Dino De Laurentiis, merchandising, book publishing contracts, etc.) to the Cooper Estate. The Judge explicitly stated in his ruling that his judgement, which came after the Universal judgement, did not alter or affect the ruling that the character and his story had already entered the public domain. In the aftermath of this, the Cooper Estate sold most of this to Universal with the exception of some never quite specified publishing licenses they had acquired from RKO.

The result is that Kong media is widely split up among a number of rights holders and the public domain:

Original Characters and Story: Public Domain since the 1932 Novel entered the public domain.

King Kong (1933) and Son of Kong (1933): Rights originally held by RKO, purchased by Turner in the 1980s, and currently owned by Warner Brothers Discovery.

King Kong vs. Godzilla and King Kong Escapes: Owned by Toho, international distribution rights held by Universal.

King Kong (1976) and King Kong Lives (1986): Rights held by Studio Canal, who bought the DeLaurentiis library a while back.

King Kong (2005): Owned by Universal.

MonsterVerse Kong: Owned by Legendary Pictures.

Joe DeVito's Kong: I'm a little unclear, but I think they're owned by Joe DeVito but are published with the blessing of the Cooper Estate.

I hope that helps clarify!

Trademarks are a different situation, but the result of Universal v. Nintendo is that Kong cannot be trademarked. Under contemporary US trademark rules, fictional characters cannot be trademarked for the sake of a trademark but only in the context of being a merchandising brand logo.

EDIT:

The Mighty Kong (1998): I believe this is owned NOW by Warner Brothers, but it wasn't produced by them. It was made by a small indie studio called Lana Productions and originally distributed by indie firm Legacy Releasing, which was acquired by Warner Brothers in 1999.

The King Kong Show: The animated series that King Kong Escapes is the live action adaptation of, and the original source for both Dr. Hu and Mechanikong. This was originally produced by Rankin/Bass on a license from RKO (similar to what happened with KKvG) and remained with Rankin/Bass. The pre-1974 Rankin/Bass catalog was acquired by Classic Media, which was bought by Dreamworks Animation in 2012, which was bought by and is currently owned by Universal since 2016.

I'm sure digging I'll find who owns what. The key thing to note is that a LOT of Kong media actually exists thanks to Kong's public domain status: pretty much all the animated stuff, the Broadway musical, etc.

After the original film goes public domain in 2029, what other ways could things potentially get shaken up? Obviously anyone will legally be able to use the character, bur besides that.

[Pkmatrix]

^ I thought the Broadway show was done with the blessing of the Cooper Estate like the DeVito books?

If they have, that's news to me. All the materials I read for the play (my boss went to see it and brought them into work for me to check out) all cited the Lovelace novel and did not mention the Cooper family, just Merian C. Cooper.

There's more minutia in there when you try to boil it down to specific characters and versions of said characters.

Oh totally! I was just trying to make clear that Kong is like Dracula or Robin Hood: lots of different versions owned by different people, but nobody owns the base character or story anymore.

After the original film goes public domain in 2029, what other ways could things potentially get shaken up? Obviously anyone will legally be able to use the character, bur besides that.

Well, there's a few things:

1. Son of Kong enters the public domain too since it also was released in 1933, which means that story and those characters are now going to be free to use as well.

2. King Kong's original score will also be entering the public domain. So don't be surprised if suddenly those original classic themes start popping up in commercials and on TikTok!

3. As public domain movies anyone will now be free to copy, post, re-release, and distribute King Kong and Son of Kong. Right now King Kong is only available to stream on Apple TV, the Microsoft Store, and Amazon (and you gotta pay $3.99 to do so), while Son of Kong is only available on Apple TV and Amazon. Once both movies are public domain, you will see them suddenly become much more easily accessible once nobody has to buy rights from Warner Brothers anymore, and that includes free uploads on Youtube that won't be taken down for copyright violation.

I imagine there's going to be an uptick in Kong books and merchandise in 2029, and it wouldn't shock me if at least some producers out there are already discussing plans to finance new independent Kong movies or a new animated series. Don't be surprised if a studio other than Legendary announces a new remake of King Kong around then. I think Son of Kong is untapped potential for kids media in particular, so it wouldn't be a shock if a kids-targeted animated series about Kiko gets announced for Netflix.

[LegendZilla]

^It could also be an opportunity for Toho to use the character again. On top of that, one thing I'm hoping for is that Kong being public domain could potentially allow for a legal loophole for the Japanese cut of KKvG to be distributed in the west.

[Mr. Yellow]

^It could also be an opportunity for Toho to use the character again. On top of that, one thing I'm hoping for is that Kong being public domain could potentially allow for a legal loophole for the Japanese cut of KKvG to be distributed in the west.

I don't know, that seems like a super gray area. Universal might still be able to wag a finger at it.
I just want the Toho Kong to start showing up in Godzilla related media again.

[LegendZilla]

I don't know, that seems like a super gray area. Universal might still be able to wag a finger at it.
I just want the Toho Kong to start showing up in Godzilla related media again.

Why would Universal not want to release the Japanese version themselves? Pride?

[Pkmatrix]

^It could also be an opportunity for Toho to use the character again. On top of that, one thing I'm hoping for is that Kong being public domain could potentially allow for a legal loophole for the Japanese cut of KKvG to be distributed in the west.

That, unfortunately, I highly doubt. ^_^; While the character, story, and the original two movies will be public domain, King Kong vs. Godzilla will remain locked tightly under copyright in the US until 2058 (2059 for the US version). No loophole to exploit, unfortunately - both Universal and Toho dotted their I's and crossed their T's.

I don't know, that seems like a super gray area. Universal might still be able to wag a finger at it.
I just want the Toho Kong to start showing up in Godzilla related media again.

Technically Toho could, right now, reintroduce Kong. He's been public domain since the 1970s (technically 1960s, but nobody noticed or legally acknowledged it until the '70s), just all the different corporate parties involved have done a really good job keeping that fact quiet. I mean, hell, people are still asking this question and being skeptical of the answer even though this was legally settled almost half a century ago. That Deadline, the Hollywood Reporter, and others had to take the time to explain that Kong is a public domain character when explaining how Legendary was allowed to move K:SI to Warner Brothers and that, somehow, everyone forgot this widely reported tidbit on a movie we were all closely following the production of...just, wow. xD

But, that aside, yeah it'd be neat for Toho to bring back their Kong or some new version of Kong of their own. Hell, I wouldn't mind seeing Toho take a stab at doing their own remake of the original movie!

Why would Universal not want to release the Japanese version themselves? Pride?

They seem to just not be interested?

[LegendZilla]

^They could budge if enough money was raised in a petition, or if the demand was high enough.

Plus, I'm not saying the 1962 film could go public domain after 2029, but Kong's public domain status could make Hollywood studios less eager to maintain a stranglehold on the character.

[Legion1979]

Why would Toho want to use Kong when that's also what Legendary is doing RIGHT NOW. Seems like a gross conflict of interests. LP needs Kong. Toho doesn't.

[Mr. Yellow]

Why would Toho want to use Kong when that's also what Legendary is doing RIGHT NOW. Seems like a gross conflict of interests. LP needs Kong. Toho doesn't.

Kong doesn't need to be in the movies, just be allowed to be on more merchandise like licensed comics, video games, etc.

[edgaguirus]

Toho might use Kong if the Monsterverse films are performing well in Japan.

[Pkmatrix]

Why would Toho want to use Kong when that's also what Legendary is doing RIGHT NOW. Seems like a gross conflict of interests. LP needs Kong. Toho doesn't.

Which is among the bigger reasons why you don't see all the studios making Kong movies even though they are able to. On top of Kong being an expensive story to remake, Legendary is using him right now and any non Legendary movie that comes out is going to be directly competing with the Monsterverse.

[LegendZilla]

Seems like a gross conflict of interests. LP needs Kong. Toho doesn't.

So what if Toho doen't need Kong per say? What matters is that they CAN use him after 2029.

[Legion1979]

Okay.....

[SoggyNoodles2016]

Seems like a gross conflict of interests. LP needs Kong. Toho doesn't.

So what if Toho doen't need Kong per say? What matters is that they CAN use him after 2029.

This "it doesn't matter it doesn't make sense to use it, we have it and we can" attitude about IP is why cinema is a fucking shitshow rn.

[Gojira18]

Rewatched 2005 King Kong with some friends, still as fantastic as ever.

[Pkmatrix]

Rewatched 2005 King Kong with some friends, still as fantastic as ever.

I've been thinking of revisiting it as well! It's a great movie, and easily one of the best adventure films of the last 30 years.

[LegendZilla]

Rewatched 2005 King Kong with some friends, still as fantastic as ever.

I've been thinking of revisiting it as well! It's a great movie, and easily one of the best adventure films of the last 30 years.

Most complaints geared towards the film regard how its overly long and drawn out.

[edgaguirus]

You might say the same about the LotR and Hobbit films. Jackson made a two hour plus film about a single battle.

The 2005 Kong is a good remake. Definitely better than the 80s version.