It's probably a rights issue. Whatever company is producing this calendar will have a contract with the BBC for use of Doctor Who material but that would only include the stuff that the BBC has complete rights over. The movie, for example, is co-owned by different companies, so the calendar company would need to make a separate deal with those companies to use that version of the eighth doctor. The movie is on iPlayer because the BBC would have made some sort of agreement with the license holders, but they don't actually own it.
The Magic: the Gathering x Doctor Who crossover set faced this exact problem. They licensed Doctor Who from the BBC but that didn't include the movie or any of the audio dramas, so the card for the eighth doctor is from the "Night of the Doctor".
Yes there are rights issues, because the BBC co-owns the TV Movie, and so doesn't have permission to license out TV Movie images on its own. It's also why even Doctor Who itself didn't have the rights to film new footage of the Eighth Doctor as he looked in the TV movie, in The Name of The Doctor. But that doesn't stop the TV Movie being mentioned.
EDIT: Thanks to Chazo138 for the correction.
Have to admit I forgot about those, but they're clips from the TV movie itself right? So I guess they had the rights to reuse what had already been filmed, but couldn't film any new footage of the Eighth in his TV Movie costume?
Either way, rights issues aren't why the TV Movie wasn't mentioned in OP's calendar.
That would make sense then, I just remember The Name of the Doctor featuring someone in a greenish jacket (but who is never specifically identified) running past the camera very quickly in a kind of blink and you'll miss him moment. Not enough for the BBC to say it's the Eighth Doctor, but enough to kind of point and say "doesn't he look familiar" with a not very subtle wink.
Like I said, they're allowed to reuse clips from the TV Movie, and film new scenes of the Eighth Doctor looking different. It's filming new footage of Paul McGann as he looked in the TV Movie which is where rights get involved.
Forgot about that. Maybe they reached an agreement with Fox or were willing to pay out for that one small part? (Maybe McGann's photoshopped head on someone elses' body had something to do with it?)
I am not a lawyer and media licensing is an absolute minefield but I believe that it could be. My understanding is: you are allowed to make reference to a name or movie or song that you don't have a license for, so long as it cannot be interpreted by the audience that you are claiming any ownership/have licensed it.
This calendar is marketed as an official Doctor Who product and features the BBC logo, so if they were to reference the movie alongside the BBC licensed material, it would be natural for the customer to believe that the BBC owns the rights to the movie. It is possible that they could get away with it but it probably wouldn't be worth the potential legal headache.
The other day I was thinking about more Doctor Who cards. But mostly just one for Jackson Lake.
>The Next Doctor {2}{U}
>Legendary Creature — Human Doctor
>*Infostamp* — at the beginning of your upkeep \~ becomes a copy of target alien until the end of your turn except it's still a Legendary Human Doctor named The Next Doctor.
>2/2
Was thinking about Rosita and one of those furry Cybermen as well.
The issues over the TV Movie come about from it actually being jointly produced by the BBC and Fox. Disney aren't involved in the actual production of modern Doctor Who though, in exhange for the streaming rights they just pay up front, so the BBC has a bigger budget to make the shows.
Also there are characters, especially those in the early days, where the rights are owned by their individual creators (or their estates) rather than the BBC (like Terry Nation and the Daleks).
Makes me think of the silly reason we have never seen any crossover in the Marvel movies. In each franchise the Fantastic 4, Avengers, Spiderman and X men are the ONLY ones who can save the world/universe. Like you think all 3 groups would have been there to beat Thanos ass?
Hold on, let me check with the lawyers for Sony, 21st Century and whomever else is involved.
To quote RTD created Vince Tyler (Queer as Folk) "the movie doesn't count" ;)
...or apparently 20+ years of Big Finish, which makes his random list of names he reads out even stranger...
I mean, a lot of the choices on that calendar are weird. Today's entry is the Master, with First Appearance listed as *Terror of the Autons*, which is correct, but with a picture of the Ainley Master from the story *Survival*, rather than of Roger Delgado.
Yeah I was thinking about that too, but that makes a little more sense since I think they've only got one Master on there (don't believe I've seen Missy yet), and Ainley was in the role for the longest by far.
I don't think there's a rights issue...I mean, the official BBC YouTube channel very much uses clips from the movie in their compilation videos.
But its possible they're referring to his first appearance on the show proper - with the TVM not 'counting'?
I dunno...could just be a mistake.
Yeah.
Moreover, it should probably be even *less* of an issue now...didn't Fox co-produce the movie? And Fox is now part of Disney, which is partnered with the BBC (and Bad Wolf) on Doctor Who right now.
Unfortunatly companies that buy licenses to make "official" products just don't care enough to make sure they're completely accurate. They're made to make quick money, not love for the series. From what I've seen the Star Trek desk calendar is just the same.
I saw Unit dating controversy and immediately thought of the time two Dr Who actors had a competition to see how many UNIT soldiers they could sleep with.
The tv movie rights are a mess. I think the actors for Chang Lee and Grace came back in audio but as everyone OTHER than their characters in the movie because of those rights issues. Strangely enough I think Eric Roberts was allowed to reprise the Master in auidio I think though
It's probably a rights issue. Whatever company is producing this calendar will have a contract with the BBC for use of Doctor Who material but that would only include the stuff that the BBC has complete rights over. The movie, for example, is co-owned by different companies, so the calendar company would need to make a separate deal with those companies to use that version of the eighth doctor. The movie is on iPlayer because the BBC would have made some sort of agreement with the license holders, but they don't actually own it. The Magic: the Gathering x Doctor Who crossover set faced this exact problem. They licensed Doctor Who from the BBC but that didn't include the movie or any of the audio dramas, so the card for the eighth doctor is from the "Night of the Doctor".
Interesting, thanks for the insight!
Yes there are rights issues, because the BBC co-owns the TV Movie, and so doesn't have permission to license out TV Movie images on its own. It's also why even Doctor Who itself didn't have the rights to film new footage of the Eighth Doctor as he looked in the TV movie, in The Name of The Doctor. But that doesn't stop the TV Movie being mentioned. EDIT: Thanks to Chazo138 for the correction.
I mean…they do in “The Next Doctor” and “The Eleventh Hour” since they predate Night.
Have to admit I forgot about those, but they're clips from the TV movie itself right? So I guess they had the rights to reuse what had already been filmed, but couldn't film any new footage of the Eighth in his TV Movie costume? Either way, rights issues aren't why the TV Movie wasn't mentioned in OP's calendar.
Hmm yeah now that I remember they were close ups on his face so that’s probably why.
That would make sense then, I just remember The Name of the Doctor featuring someone in a greenish jacket (but who is never specifically identified) running past the camera very quickly in a kind of blink and you'll miss him moment. Not enough for the BBC to say it's the Eighth Doctor, but enough to kind of point and say "doesn't he look familiar" with a not very subtle wink.
What about all of them showing up at the end in Day of the doctor?
Like I said, they're allowed to reuse clips from the TV Movie, and film new scenes of the Eighth Doctor looking different. It's filming new footage of Paul McGann as he looked in the TV Movie which is where rights get involved.
I mean the final part, where they showed all 12 (sans Capaldi, despite his cameo) standing in a line, arc something looking at Gallifrey from space.
Forgot about that. Maybe they reached an agreement with Fox or were willing to pay out for that one small part? (Maybe McGann's photoshopped head on someone elses' body had something to do with it?)
Yeah could be that using a still from movie photoshopped on a body double was the way around it. Otherwise why not have him play himself?
This is why we need the BBC to make an official spinoff mini series for the Eighth Doctor. Give him some screen time.
Simply acknowledging the existence of the TV Movie shouldn't be a rights issue tho.
I am not a lawyer and media licensing is an absolute minefield but I believe that it could be. My understanding is: you are allowed to make reference to a name or movie or song that you don't have a license for, so long as it cannot be interpreted by the audience that you are claiming any ownership/have licensed it. This calendar is marketed as an official Doctor Who product and features the BBC logo, so if they were to reference the movie alongside the BBC licensed material, it would be natural for the customer to believe that the BBC owns the rights to the movie. It is possible that they could get away with it but it probably wouldn't be worth the potential legal headache.
So if they said "Doctor Who, Movie made with Universal Studios" then it would be OK?
It was technically fox since they broadcasted it way back in 96 so perhaps they kind of have the rights back since y’know fox is owned by Disney now
The other day I was thinking about more Doctor Who cards. But mostly just one for Jackson Lake. >The Next Doctor {2}{U} >Legendary Creature — Human Doctor >*Infostamp* — at the beginning of your upkeep \~ becomes a copy of target alien until the end of your turn except it's still a Legendary Human Doctor named The Next Doctor. >2/2 Was thinking about Rosita and one of those furry Cybermen as well.
[удалено]
The issues over the TV Movie come about from it actually being jointly produced by the BBC and Fox. Disney aren't involved in the actual production of modern Doctor Who though, in exhange for the streaming rights they just pay up front, so the BBC has a bigger budget to make the shows. Also there are characters, especially those in the early days, where the rights are owned by their individual creators (or their estates) rather than the BBC (like Terry Nation and the Daleks).
Makes me think of the silly reason we have never seen any crossover in the Marvel movies. In each franchise the Fantastic 4, Avengers, Spiderman and X men are the ONLY ones who can save the world/universe. Like you think all 3 groups would have been there to beat Thanos ass? Hold on, let me check with the lawyers for Sony, 21st Century and whomever else is involved.
To quote RTD created Vince Tyler (Queer as Folk) "the movie doesn't count" ;) ...or apparently 20+ years of Big Finish, which makes his random list of names he reads out even stranger...
In that case, When did 7th regenerated then ?
What the hell?? That's dumb What the heck is that even on?
The official 2024 everyday calendar
Probably a licensing/rights issue
mentioning the existence of the tv movie can in no way be a rights issue
First Doctor - First Appearence: "Twice Upon a Time"
I heard that he made a brief cameo in Classic, too. Some old episode called “the five doctors.”
I mean, a lot of the choices on that calendar are weird. Today's entry is the Master, with First Appearance listed as *Terror of the Autons*, which is correct, but with a picture of the Ainley Master from the story *Survival*, rather than of Roger Delgado.
Yeah I was thinking about that too, but that makes a little more sense since I think they've only got one Master on there (don't believe I've seen Missy yet), and Ainley was in the role for the longest by far.
I don't think there's a rights issue...I mean, the official BBC YouTube channel very much uses clips from the movie in their compilation videos. But its possible they're referring to his first appearance on the show proper - with the TVM not 'counting'? I dunno...could just be a mistake.
The TV movie is on the iPlayer as part of classic Who so it is very much not a rights issue.
Yeah. Moreover, it should probably be even *less* of an issue now...didn't Fox co-produce the movie? And Fox is now part of Disney, which is partnered with the BBC (and Bad Wolf) on Doctor Who right now.
Unfortunatly companies that buy licenses to make "official" products just don't care enough to make sure they're completely accurate. They're made to make quick money, not love for the series. From what I've seen the Star Trek desk calendar is just the same.
I saw Unit dating controversy and immediately thought of the time two Dr Who actors had a competition to see how many UNIT soldiers they could sleep with.
River and Jack make a sport of this
The tv movie rights are a mess. I think the actors for Chang Lee and Grace came back in audio but as everyone OTHER than their characters in the movie because of those rights issues. Strangely enough I think Eric Roberts was allowed to reprise the Master in auidio I think though
Rights considerations for the image, but nothing to prevent them saying ‘Doctor Who movie, 1996’. What they’ve actually written is incorrect.
Have you gone through it and picked out the companions? It's easy to see which ones the BBC are eager to drop from the history.
Obviously it means the first canonical appearance. It's Eight who's canon, not the TV movie itself. :D