Is "The Land Before Time" now a Disney movie?

[Goofyuk]

Before you all reply with a quick NO, let me explain what I mean.

When the movie was created/released it was not Disney affiliated in any way. The production companies involved in the ownership of the movie were Bluth Studios (now defunct) Amblin Entertainment (Spielberg's company) and LucasFilm (NOW OWNED BY DISNEY)

When Disney bought Lucasfilms, did the rights for this movie come with it and it is now technically a Disney movie and Disney has the license for the characters or do the rights belong to Amblin?

 

[luisov]

Isn't this case somehow similar to that of The Wizard of Oz? Like, Disney can use the Oz IP, but they cannot use the same story of the original Wizard of Oz movie.

I'm just guessing though.

 

[jcnewton]

There's a listing for the first movie on Lucasfilm's website, however, the most recent sequel from 2007 was produced and distributed by Universal. I could be wrong, but I think Universal might own the rights, even though the original was produced (in part) by Lucasfilm.

 

[Josh Hendy]

A side note:

Does Disney/Lucasfilm own the rights to the Star Wars movies? Apparently not, at least not in some crucial areas. The rights are controlled by 20th Century Fox.

I believe that one of the purposes of the Star Wars "special edition" re-releases of episodes IV through VI was to change the movies so drastically that they could not be considered the property of 20th Century Fox, but would now be considered practically new movies which would belong to Lucasfilm. That is why Lucas felt obligated to make so many arbitrary and even downright silly changes. My impression was that practically every frame of the movies was digitally altered, or at least a majority of them. This means that the original films which were funded by and presumably majority-owned by 20th Century Fox are technically not the same ones that are being shown.

But of course nearly all of the characters and scenes in the "original three" movies are more or less the same as they were in the 20th C Fox versions. There must have been some kind of deal with Fox over the making and distribution of the special editions, even if Lucas was able to claim "more" royalties and "more" rights over them on the basis of having drastically changed the films.

Therefore I assume that Fox might have some say in, control over, and revenue from future Disney theme park attractions, not to mention the release of new episodes in the near future.

 

[Grand Admiral]

I dislike these movies because they teach kids cutesy kiddie names for dinosaurs.

We'll only have authentic scientific names under my roof! Dinosaur Train for my boy!

 

[DanBoris]

A side note:

Does Disney/Lucasfilm own the rights to the Star Wars movies? Apparently not, at least not in some crucial areas. The rights are controlled by 20th Century Fox.

I believe that one of the purposes of the Star Wars "special edition" re-releases of episodes IV through VI was to change the movies so drastically that they could not be considered the property of 20th Century Fox, but would now be considered practically new movies which would belong to Lucasfilm. That is why Lucas felt obligated to make so many arbitrary and even downright silly changes. My impression was that practically every frame of the movies was digitally altered, or at least a majority of them. This means that the original films which were funded by and presumably majority-owned by 20th Century Fox are technically not the same ones that are being shown.

But of course nearly all of the characters and scenes in the "original three" movies are more or less the same as they were in the 20th C Fox versions. There must have been some kind of deal with Fox over the making and distribution of the special editions, even if Lucas was able to claim "more" royalties and "more" rights over them on the basis of having drastically changed the films.

Therefore I assume that Fox might have some say in, control over, and revenue from future Disney theme park attractions, not to mention the release of new episodes in the near future.

Fox owns the distribution rights to A New Hope in perpetuity (forever), but they only hold the distribution rights to the other 5 movies until May 2020.

 

[JoWiJo]

Isn't this case somehow similar to that of The Wizard of Oz? Like, Disney can use the Oz IP, but they cannot use the same story of the original Wizard of Oz movie.

I'm just guessing though.

For the most part, Disney absolutely CAN use the same story as the original movie, just as Universal can make their own Snow White, Pinnochio, Sleeping Beauty, and Cinderella movies. All of those stories have fallen into public domain.

There are limitations, naturally. If someone wanted to produce their version of Snow White, the characters can't look like Disney's rendition or use the same seven names for the dwarves that Disney picked. And the same concept applies to the other Disney movies I mentioned. Similarly, Disney can use the same story L. Frank Baum wrote, but had better steer away from the use of the ruby slippers.

And, just in the off chance someone cares, yes, I know that the Judy Garland movie isn't really the original Wizard of Oz movie. It's just the one that's so well known and has stood the test of time.

 

[Odelay]

I dislike these movies because they teach kids cutesy kiddie names for dinosaurs. We'll only have authentic scientific names under my roof! Dinosaur Train for my boy!

Lucky kids.