< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Dec-23-11|| ||Once: <Shams> There's quite a bit about the copyright issue on the wikipedia link that <Phony> gave. Complicated stuff. It seems that the film even helped to set case law.|
|Dec-23-11|| ||FSR: <Once><Shams> Remember, Wikipedia contains all human knowledge:|
<Liberty Films was purchased by Paramount Pictures, and remained a subsidiary until 1951. In 1955, M. & A. Alexander purchased the movie. This included key rights to the original television syndication, the original nitrate film elements, the music score, and the film rights to the story on which the film is based, "The Greatest Gift".[N 8] National Telefilm Associates (NTA) took over the rights to the film soon thereafter.
A clerical error at NTA prevented the copyright from being renewed properly in 1974. Despite the lapsed copyright, television stations that aired it still were required to pay royalties. Although the film's images had entered the public domain, the film's story was still protected by virtue of it being a derivative work of the published story "The Greatest Gift", whose copyright was properly renewed by Philip Van Doren Stern in 1971.[N 9] The film became a perennial holiday favorite in the 1980s, possibly due to its repeated showings each holiday season on hundreds of local television stations. It was mentioned during the deliberations on the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998.
In 1993, Republic Pictures, which was the successor to NTA, relied on the 1990 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Stewart v. Abend (which involved another Stewart film, Rear Window) to enforce its claim to the copyright. While the film's copyright had not been renewed, Republic still owned the original film elements, the music score, and the film rights to "The Greatest Gift"; thus the plaintiffs were able to argue its status as a derivative work of a work still under copyright. It's a Wonderful Life is no longer shown as often on television as it was before enforcement of that derivative copyright. NBC is licensed to show the film on U.S. network television, and traditionally shows it twice during the holidays, with one showing on Christmas Eve. Paramount (via parent company Viacom's 1998 acquisition of Republic's then-parent, Spelling Entertainment) once again has distribution rights for the first time since 1955.
Due to all the above actions, this is one of the few RKO films not controlled by Turner Entertainment/Warner Bros. in the USA. It is also one of two Capra films which Paramount owns despite not having originally released it — the other is Broadway Bill (originally from Columbia, remade by Paramount as Riding High in 1950).> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_a...
|Dec-23-11|| ||brucejavier: Guys that 1800 guy in only a 8 Year kid, what an amazing feat to beat an IM at such an age!|
|Dec-23-11|| ||Once: <brucejavier> And that 1800 rating is almost certainly an underestimate. When kids are very strong early in their life their official grade usually lags some way behind their true playing strength. Their early losses while they were learning the game tend to hold back their wins as their ability and understanding accelerates. |
It's something that we see at my humble little chess club. Each year we hold a handicap speed chess challenge. Depending on the difference between your grade and your opponent's, you might find yourself 1 or 2 pawns down (which can actually be an advantage) all the way up to giving away queen odds. Or your opponent can choose a time advantage which means that you might have two minutes for the entire game and he has eight.
And that can mean that you end up playing these ferocious little ankle-biters who are much stronger than their grade. And the little monsters are usually quite good at speed chess because they play constantly online.
Picture the scene. You are playing a pipsqueak brat who can hardly see over the end of the board, with X-box honed reflexes, no fear, not yet interested in the opposite sex (so no distractions) and you are having to give away a rook or a queen because their tiddly published grade still contains all the games they lost to their school chums while they were still working out which way the horsey jumps.
And everyone in the club is gathered around your game because the kid has nothing to lose and you have everything on the line. If he loses, no-one notices. He wasn't expected to win. But if you lose your team-mates won't let you forget about it for years.
Bitter? Me? Naaahhh.
They don't me Fast Eddie Once for nothing. Actually they don't call me Fast Eddie at all. Except my first wife, and that is another story.
|Dec-23-11|| ||erniecohen: <Although the film's images had entered the public domain, the film's story was still protected by virtue of it being a derivative work of the published story "The Greatest Gift", whose copyright was properly renewed by Philip Van Doren Stern in 1971.>|
So that means that if you re-edit the film to change the story (think "what's Up, Tiger Lilly?"), you could make (and copyright) your own derivative. Sounds like a good project.
|Dec-23-11|| ||KidEunuch: Awonder is only 1800 FIDE, but his USCF rating is a hair under 2100. He is now U-8 World Champion. I lost to him last January in Wisconsin. The kid could barely reach the last rank standing on his chair.|
|Dec-23-11|| ||Once: <erniecohen> A similar curio is the James Bond film "Never say never again". This was a remake of Thunderball by one of the writers of that film who claimed that he retained the rights to the story. See this link for more on that one|
|Dec-23-11|| ||rilkefan: <<erniecohen>: <rilkefan> Actually, 25...Be3 was only a minor blunder.>|
Stockfish thinks it's worth between two pawns and a piece (-1.3 -> +1.1, evaluated at a depth of 30/2 Gnodes in each case) - some would call that a swing from objectively won to objectively lost.
|Dec-23-11|| ||AylerKupp: <Once> Some legal issues also surrounded Ian Fleming's first James Bond novel, "Casino Royale". I don't have my facts but for some reason when Harry Saltzman and Albert R. Broccoli acquired the movie rights for the James Bond movies, "Casino Royale" was not part of the deal. As a result, a movie (if you can call it that)was made by Columbia in 1967 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casino...(1967_film) ). It starred David Niven as James Bond #1 and, get this, Woody Allen (!) as his son and James Bond #2. The novel was recently re-made as a picture in 2006 starring the current James Bond, Daniel Craig (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casino...(2006_film) )|
One challenge I like to pose to my friends is to name all the actors that have portrayed James Bond in the movies. I have yet to lose since no one (such was the non-impact of the first "Casino Royale" movie) mentions David Niven. And Woody Allen as James Bond? We'll, some things are too strange to be believed.
|Dec-23-11|| ||King Death: <AylerKupp> Woody Allen as James Bond?
Well, in later life he had a way with at least one young woman, so maybe you could make a case for that.|
|Dec-23-11|| ||goodevans: "Living in a wint <Awonder Liang>"|
|Dec-23-11|| ||goodevans: <AylerKupp> The reason nobody mentions David Niven as James Bond is because the 1967 Casino Royale was a spoof. Indeed practically the whole cast played "James Bond", including Ursula Andress. If you name David Niven then you have to name them all!|
Far from having little impact it is well known and liked in its genre but to compare it with the Cubby Broccoli James Bond films doesn't make sense.
The 1967 Casino Royale also has one of the all time great movie theme tunes by Burt Bacharach!
|Dec-23-11|| ||Once: Ah yes, Casino Royale. A little bit too spoofy for my tastes. And <goodevans> is quite right that most of the cast get called James Bond at some point.|
Incidentally, the first person to play James Bond in the official films is not Sean Connery but the stunt man Bob Simmons. In the intro sequence he is the one framed in the gun sight who turns around and shoots at the camera at the beginning of Dr No.
|Dec-23-11|| ||erniecohen: <rilkefan: Stockfish thinks it's worth between two pawns and a piece (-1.3 - +1.1, evaluated at a depth of 30/2 Gnodes in each case) - some would call that a swing from objectively won to objectively lost.>|
That seems like too extreme an evaluation on both sides.
After 25...b4 26. e2 d3 27. xd3 exd3 28. c3 f8 29. xf8+ xf8 30. xd3 xb2:
click for larger view
Black stands better, but the most likely result is a draw
After 25...e3 play might go 26. d1 xg5 27. cxd5 exd5 28. xd5+ h8 29. xe4 xe7:
click for larger view
Now white is a pawn up, but with opposite color bishops, the most likely result is again a draw.
|Dec-23-11|| ||rilkefan: <<erniecohen>: Black stands better, but the most likely result is a draw>|
I don't have an opinion (note the "some"), but here stockfish seems to think white has to play 31.h4 Qa1+ 32.Kh2 Qxe5+ 33.g3 h6 34.Bd2, a position white can't win and black can't lose, one I wouldn't wish to defend, and where I would think an older player would have an extra edge.
I take your point about OCBs in the second line. I wonder if there's play for white via h3 and activating the rook or via Qd5.
|Dec-23-11|| ||goodevans: <Once: Ah yes, Casino Royale. A little bit too spoofy for my tastes.>|
Mine too. It's a sad indictment on a film when its opening credits are far better than anything that follows.
But that's just my opinion. Lot's would disagree.
|Dec-23-11|| ||AylerKupp: <goodevans> I doubt it. This is probably one subject on which there is likely to be unanimous agreement. What an awful movie in all respects! Except the opening credits, of course.|
|Dec-23-11|| ||erniecohen: <rilkefan> I suggest you let stockfish (or perhaps some stronger engine) play itself from the position and see what happens. Again, I'm not saying that 25...e3 wasn't a blunder, just that it wasn't comparable to 27...b2, which took Black from a defensible position to resignation in two moves.|
|Dec-23-11|| ||erniecohen: For the record, Woody Allen didn't play James Bond, he played Jimmy Bond, James' son. And he had the one memorable scene of the film. He is against a wall, about to be executed by firing squad, and asks to smoke a last cigarette which turns out to be a smoke bomb. He climbs over the wall - and lands on the other side at the foot of a blindfolded man in front of another firing squad that is just about to fire.|
|Dec-23-11|| ||rilkefan: <I'm not saying that 25...Be3 wasn't a blunder>|
Well, that was actually my point/joke.
|Dec-23-11|| ||Penguincw: I like the pun.|
|Dec-23-11|| ||Rosbach: 25...Ne3 would have been the better move.|
|Dec-23-11|| ||Mike Ivanov: Nobody mentioned the best part of this story, Awonder has a brother named Adream who's also a respectable chess player:)|
|Dec-27-11|| ||kevin86: A battle of the bank-rank mate.
Happy Festivus:hoping everyone enjoyed the poal,airing of greavances,and feets of strength. (note:spelleng dont kount in festivus)
|Oct-11-12|| ||Catholic Bishop: "It's Awonder Full Life"
This pun would be even better if it was a game of Go
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·