Who Owns...the Story, the Characters, the Fictional World, I Guess?

Sorry if this is a stupid question with an obvious answer that I should already know or figure out without asking, or something.

So, say someone writes a spec script and someone else buys that spec script. I think I get that that someone else owns the rights to the film. But, does that someone else also own everything else, too? I don't know, I guess I'm talking about the story, the characters, and the fictional world of the script.

So, for example, though a production company bought the writer's screenplay, may the writer do other things with his/her story, characters, or fictional world that they created? May he/she, for example, go off on their own and write the novelization of the screenplay that they sold? Or, if not, may he/she at least write a different story with the same characters in the same fictional universe that they created?

Or, has the screenwriter's ownership of those elements and his/her rights to them been fully severed?

Does it all depend on the contract or the deal made with the purchase? Does that vary? If so, what's the standard practice or what are the standard terms? What can a spec screenwriter
expect?

For a hypothetical:

What if J.K. Rowling had written Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone the spec screenplay, not the published novel (which Warner Brothers bought the films rights to)? And what if she had sold that spec screenplay to Warner Brothers? Would she still have been able to write the novel version or the sequels as screenplays or as novels as she pleased, or would she have sold all such rights to do so when she sold that spec screenplay? In other words, I suppose, would Warner Brothers own all such rights to the world of Harry Potter, its characters, and any further stories that might be written or published about it etc?

Maybe this is an ignorant question for me to entertain, but I suppose I'm wondering if there is a different power relationship, of sorts, between a studio or production company with a published author from whom they want to buy the film rights with which to make a film adaptation of the author's book compared with a studio's or production company's relationship with a spec screenplay writer? Or perhaps more to the point, is there a difference between the rights or the ownership that the author retains versus what the the spec screenwriter retains?
 
Last edited:
Ok, when you're buying a screenplay, you're effectively buying the rights to exploit that screenplay/script/novel/book/treatment/concept etc. etc.

The answer to your questions is: It depends on the terms.

If all rights in all regions were sold to the purchaser, then the author has no ability to exploit.

What if J.K. Rowling had written Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone the spec screenplay, not the published novel (which Warner Brothers bought the films rights to)? And what if she had sold that spec screenplay to Warner Brothers? Would she still have been able to write the novel version or the sequels as screenplays or as novels as she pleased, or would she have sold all such rights to do so when she sold that spec screenplay? In other words, I suppose, would Warner Brothers own all such rights to the world of Harry Potter, its characters, and any further stories that might be written or published about it etc?

My understanding of this situation is Warner Brothers would licence Harry Potter for worldwide rights for filming, including ancillary and merchandising rights which would may or may not include the book sales (which falls under ancillary sales). If it included the book sales (which I doubt it would) the purchase price would be a lot higher.

This can be done on a book by book deal, or a deal could be made for the entire series, which in the case of Harry Potter would have included unwritten books. It's all about how much the studio wanted the franchise and how much of a position of power Rowling was in.

Maybe this is an ignorant question for me to entertain, but I suppose I'm wondering if there is a different power relationship, of sorts, between a studio or production company with a published author from whom they want to buy the film rights with which to make a film adaptation of the author's book compared with a studio's or production company's relationship with a spec screenplay writer? Or perhaps more to the point, is there a difference between the rights or the ownership that the author retains versus what the the spec screenwriter retains?

There is most definitely a different power relationship. One is most likely a writer who is being courted by different studios, and the other is a lonely writer who is hoping that a studio/production company throw them a bread crumb to take their masterpiece and turn it into a movie.

What rights are bought comes down to the negotiation. The right to future exploitation isn't something that a studio wants to leave on the table without reason in case it becomes a runaway success.

It may be safer to consult an entertainment lawyer in your country though.
 
In general for a writers first sale all the rights are purchased.
That includes the story, the characters and the fictional world
of the script. In your example, Rowling would sell all the rights.
She would not have been able to write the novel version or the
sequels.

No contract is prewritten. If a writer wants to retain some rights
they can negotiate that in the contract. For obvious reasons the
studio will want to get as many rights as possible. Obviously the
writer will want to retain as many rights as possible. And this is
where the track record and success of the writer come into play.

A writer who has no previous track record is not in a good place
to negotiate more creative control over their script, story, characters
and fictional world. In general a writer negotiating their first sale
will not be a place to retain all the non-film and sequel rights.
 
This reminds me of a story.

Once upon a time, a young screenwriter/director came up with a sci-fi script that was so far out that nobody in Hollywood wanted to touch it. He'd done a couple of prior movies, one of which had done very well, so the studio that had released the previous film finally caved and took on the new project as a favor, but only if the writer/director reduced the film's budget and took a substantial cut in his own pay.

He agreed, with the stipulation that he would retain all sequel and merchandising rights to the story and characters. The studio went along with it, knowing full well that this ridiculous movie was going to flop horribly.

As you've probably already guessed, the movie was Star Wars, and the writer/director is now a billionaire.

And no studio will ever make that mistake again...until they do. :)
 
I was going to mention that example. The fact that that writer/director had
a huge hit and Oscar nominations for Best Picture and Best Director sure
helped get that deal. However, the studio that had released the previous
film did not want to cave and finance the sci-fi film. They refused. So Alan
Ladd, Jr. (who ran Fox in the 70's) made a deal with this writer/director
that he make another "kids and cars" movie if he financed his little space
opera.

Your point is a very good one - no studio is going to make THAT mistake
again.
 
However, the studio that had released the previous
film did not want to cave and finance the sci-fi film. They refused. So Alan
Ladd, Jr. (who ran Fox in the 70's) made a deal with this writer/director
that he make another "kids and cars" movie if he financed his little space
opera.

That's true. Star Wars was an independent film.

(While my anecdote was based on a true story, certain facts were changed or omitted for dramatic purposes. :D)
 
Sorry to be so pedantic but...

Universal released "American Graffiti" - just clarifying your point about the
studio that had released the previous film. "Star Wars" was a studio (Fox)
financed film not an independent film. "The Empire Strikes Back" was
independently financed and then released by 20th Century Fox.

I shouldn't get bogged down in the details - your point was still clear. No
studio today will make the mistake the Fox and Ladd made in 1976 when
it comes to giving the story, the characters and the fictional world of a script
to the writer of a spec script.
 
Your point is a very good one - no studio is going to make THAT mistake again.

Studios make calls that turn out to be wrong all the time, even the big studios. Disney for example, selling off parts of Pirates of the Caribbean to offset the losses they envisioned and keeping John Carter all to themselves.

While merchandising can be worth a lot in the case of Star Wars, but most of the it isn't worth that much for most things. If you have an obvious hit and won't sell it unless you retain the merchandising rights, you never know, you might just be able to negotiate that point. While Star Wars merchandise turned out to be a $200mil a year profit machine, can you think of anything that has come close since or even half of it?
 
While Star Wars merchandise turned out to be a $200mil a year profit machine, can you think of anything that has come close since or even half of it?
I can. But the point isn’t studios that will no longer make
mistakes. The point 2001 is making that I agree with is
studios are no longer giving away ancillary rights to writers.
They are holding on to everything even if they never exploit
those rights. Sequel/prequel, merchandise, novelizations,
spin offs, theme park attractions, live shows and more are
not being negotiated like they were in the 1970’s when Fox
gave up so much to Lucas.

I’m curious; what parts of the “Pirates” franchise did Disney
sell off? I have never heard of this.
 
Thank you very much, guys. :)

So, in a sense, it is as I feared. It is sort of a cautionary tale, isn't it?

Or at least something to consider? I mean, maybe you're writing something that you just want to sell and see made into a film, and that's great, you don't care beyond that, you'll be happy. You'll be happy to take the money and run, and enjoy seeing the film, if it's ever actually made.

But, maybe there's something else that you don't want to be cut out of... ? I'm thinking, can you imagine Rowling not being able to do anything more with her Potter creation after she had sold that first hypothetical spec script? Or GL being excluded from Star Wars after the first film was made, if he hadn't managed to retain his rights to the property? Jokes aside, it would have seriously sucked for him in such a scenario, right?
 
But, maybe there's something else that you don't want to be cut out of... ? I'm thinking, can you imagine Rowling not being able to do anything more with her Potter creation after she had sold that first hypothetical spec script? Or GL being excluded from Star Wars after the first film was made, if he hadn't managed to retain his rights to the property? Jokes aside, it would have seriously sucked for him in such a scenario, right?

Perhaps you could start by writing a novel that becomes a well known story that producers want to create into a film and then you might have a little room to move to contract. I heard a small rumor (this could be a known fact or it could be proved wrong I don't know..) but Suzanne Collins the writer of The Hunger Games wrote the story with a film in mind. If you look at her on IMDB she already had writing credits well before HG.

I'm not a writer as primary focus, I'm a Director/DP, so I don't know if this is the best path... I probably wouldn't do it myself.
 
Last edited:
I’m curious; what parts of the “Pirates” franchise did Disney
sell off? I have never heard of this.

It wasn't parts like rights or territories(I don't think), it was more like shares... which in a way is parts. It was in some (which felt like 20 hours) audiobook about the history of Disney, their management, mismanagement and so forth. I can look up the name of the audiobook if you're really interested. (though it could have been part of a Steve Jobs audiobook and his dealings with Ike and Kas but unlikely).

While I don't remember all the details, but Disney didn't have a lot of faith in Depp's character being played that way and the spiraling costs, so they hedged their bets and sold off percentages to other studios. I don't know how the deal was structured so I cannot comment on that. That's about all I remember.

Also, in regards to Star Wars A New Hope and George Lucas, the story I remember about the merchandising rights was a deal done where costs went higher than Fox was willing to spend and asked Lucas to give back his producers/directors/writers fee and merchandising rights (and possibly other rights) were part of that negotiation. Don't quote me on that, it's just what I've heard a few times from the internet/friends (It was on the internet so it must be true, right?)
 
Last edited:
Or at least something to consider? I mean, maybe you're writing something that you just want to sell and see made into a film, and that's great, you don't care beyond that, you'll be happy. You'll be happy to take the money and run, and enjoy seeing the film, if it's ever actually made.

But, maybe there's something else that you don't want to be cut out of... ? I'm thinking, can you imagine Rowling not being able to do anything more with her Potter creation after she had sold that first hypothetical spec script? Or GL being excluded from Star Wars after the first film was made, if he hadn't managed to retain his rights to the property? Jokes aside, it would have seriously sucked for him in such a scenario, right?

The other thing to consider, even if you do sign away the rights to a studio, so long as they're happy with you and your work, they are probably going to look to you for sequels anyway.

In regards to merchandising, deals that are made usually help distribution through wider advertising. Of course there are percentage deals around, while I don't remember the typical figure 2% comes to mind and merchandising agents typically take 50-60% of that anyway. Or it might be 2% after agents cut. It's worth looking up if you're really interested in it.
 
I'm thinking, can you imagine Rowling not being able to do anything more with her Potter creation after she had sold that first hypothetical spec script? Or GL being excluded from Star Wars after the first film was made, if he hadn't managed to retain his rights to the property? Jokes aside, it would have seriously sucked for him in such a scenario, right?

Hindsight is 20/20. We'll never know how often that has happened to others who weren't as fortunate as Rowling and Lucas, both of whom maintained very tight control of their properties, a rarity in itself.
 
Back
Top