Creepy Classics "Phantom" cancelled

[samurainoir]

Robert englund's


Michael crawford


Original illustration

[MIB41]

That's really interesting...and confusing. Because Lincoln put their line out while AHI held the license on Universal monsters. I don't understand how AHI and Lincoln were both paying Universal and/or the Chaney estate (where applicable) for the licensing rights to make eight inch figures. That doesn't make sense. That would suggest the estate was double dipping and stepping on AHI's toes who had paid for that license. Perhaps the Chaney estate came in after the line ended and bought "all likenesses" which included the Lincoln version? That seems to make more sense to me.

[AcroRay]

Wow - I turn away from my Mego hobby for a couple of weeks, and come back to bad news... Bummer.

[The Super Collector]

The Lincoln Phantom is unlicensed.

[MIB41]

The Lincoln Phantom is unlicensed.

Thank you! Exactly what I was thinking.

[The Super Collector]

Thank you! Exactly what I was thinking.

But it's purple and cartoony, so it may have just flown under the radar at the time. Things have become much tighter these days.

The first official licensed "action figure" of the Phantom (not a model or a statue) was by AHI/Remco in 1981 and they do consider the Chaney Phantom likeness under their banner.





I met with Universal 2-3 years ago and they wanted me to license the monsters, I still have the brochure, it looks like this:

[timb]

You could always have some artist you know come up with another possible head design/sculpt.

[samurainoir]

I'm sure it's obvious what a raving fanboy I am for ALL the ReMego product from all the current players, and I've got a great deal of love, respect, gratitude for everything that Doc/Joe/EMCE/Diamond have accomplished with being at the forefront and spearheading this movement bringing Megos back. Given the implications, I am certainly looking forward to their Mego version of a screen authentic Phantom of the Opera, whether it's the classic Chaney or Cagney version.

While I completely understand why Universal would want to flex their legal muscles in this matter, there is certainly a great deal of precedence out there with companies and organisations that behave as if the 1925 Chaney Phantom film is in public domain in the United States. It does not look like Universal has taken the necessary steps to stomp them out or correct that notion.

I'm by no means any kind of lawyer let alone copyright expert, but here's what a quick google search turns up...

Most seem to assert that Universal failed to renew their copyright in 1953. (including the wikipedia entry)

In the United States, the film is in the public domain due to Universal Pictures' failure to renew the copyright in 1953, and may be freely downloaded from the Internet Archive.

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDRev...DVD_review.htm

In 1953, Universal stupidly neglected to renew the film's copyright and "The Phantom of the Opera" lapsed into the public domain, resulting in a flood of badly duped prints that became commonly seen on TV broadcasts and cheap videos.

http://www.dvdjournal.com/reviews/p/...opera_ue.shtml

The 1929 silent edition has survived in the public domain, so it's what has most often appeared on TV, home video, and big-screen revivals, making it the version most familiar to us today.

Theoretically, this would have been under the 1909 copyright act, which would have preserved the rights for 28 years, at which point Universal would have been required to renew it to keep the rights. Thus the 1953 date. If they in fact DIDN'T do it, I'm sure it was understandable for the time given that the advent of the Talkies had made silents percievably "worthless" to the company... not anticipating all the other windows of viewership opportunity and merchandising that would eventually define our contemporary society.
Wikimedia Error

I've not seen any documentation proving this, but the Internet Archive has pulled material when challenged, and it appears that both the 1925 and 1929 Phantom of the Opera has resided there since 2008.
The Phantom of the Opera (1925) New York General Release Print : Free Download Streaming : Internet Archive
The Phantom of the Opera (1929) : Free Download Streaming : Internet Archive

It's on the list of Movies in public domain at Wikipedia.
Wikimedia Error

We've got a television distributer which has it on their list.
Welcome to Peter Rodgers Organization


Plus we have the astronomical number of non-Universal unchallenged video and DVD releases which all utilize the likeness...






I really don't know what the facts of the matter are from Universal's perspective, BUT according to copyright law in the United States, IF the likeness rights of the Phantom resided with Lon Chaney Sr. and his estate, there is a 70 year copyright following his death in 1930. Which means that it would have entered public domain about a decade ago. So his likeness was protected in all the previous products released by AHI/Remco etc back in the 60's, 70's and 80's.

There is also the slippery slope of TRADEMARK. Just to add to the confusion.
(ie i'd assume the musical stage Phantom of the Opera Logo and mask are Trademarked for example)

Again, Universal may very well have the Chaney Sr rights all sewn up given that none of us here are privy to that documentation. However, I do sympathize with the two Cast-a-Way guys and can totally understand where the confusion might stem from when they first proposed this figure. They have agreed not to produce the figure, stepping aside for what many of us are assuming to be an upcoming official Universal version.


The one thing no one here disputes is that the original prose story and title "Phantom of the Opera" is in public domain for anyone to use on their product.

[AcroRay]

I like Tim's effort, but he looks necrotic instead of horribly scarred.

[timb]

Good point, oh well: )

[samurainoir]

Also: here is the website for Chaney Entertainment which continues to license Chaney Sr's Phantom of the Opera likeness. I'm speculating that they are asserting Trademark protection for the rights to specific images? Also asserting copyrights worldwide which have not expired yet (parts of South America, Mexico, certain parts of Europe)
Lon Chaney

The estate of Arthur Conan Doyle is still actively protecting what bits of Sherlock Holmes have not fallen into public domain.
http://www.sherlockholmesonline.org/
Including trademarking and licensing the usage of a specific image of a Sherlock Holmes silhouette.

Interestingly enough, the Doyle estate is attempting to claim an assertion of copyright by citing the Sonny Bono act, which does not apply the 95 year extension on anything produced BEFORE 1978. It appears the 70 year rule still applies to work prior to 1978.
Bill Text - 105th Congress (1997-1998) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

[timb]

Alright, take 2, less necro this time:

[PNGwynne]

I like Tim's effort, but he looks necrotic instead of horribly scarred.

As he should: In the original novel, upon which the 1925 film & Chaney Sr.'s make-up is based, the Opera Ghost is a "living dead man" whose disfigurement is congenital--not the scarred result of an accident.

The character has a complex media history--the scarred idea was introduced in the 1943 re-make to make the character more "human" & sympathetic.

The scarring idea has been used in most later versions, except the ALW musical which veers back to the 1925 film & novel.

[PNGwynne]

Dave, your ideas re: copyright jibe with what I was thinking, too--but Doc's explanation of the Chaney license relationship in relation to Universal is also what I was aware of--thus my confusion.

With family/estate licensors in relation to Universal, they always have that provision about the actor's face under the make-up...

[timb]