Options

BBC Challenged over ownership of TARDIS

124»

Comments

  • Options
    Molly BloomMolly Bloom Posts: 2,318
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    A shameless publicity stunt.

    Nothing to see here. :D
  • Options
    johnnysaucepnjohnnysaucepn Posts: 6,775
    Forum Member
    I don't believe the Stef Coburn has a case but I find the willingness of fans to dismiss him out of hand and (even worse) degrade his father's achievements to be deeply unpleasant.

    I would agree with this. The man is hardly making any friends, but I don't see any need to pile on.

    Without any firm evidence, we can only go on what is currently known, or believed to be true. I doubt if the courts could do any better.
  • Options
    Shawn_LunnShawn_Lunn Posts: 9,353
    Forum Member
    He hasn't a leg to stand on.

    His tweets make him come across as rather unhinged though.
  • Options
    Irma BuntIrma Bunt Posts: 1,847
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Having read some of his tweets and his online cv (which makes for incredible - and not in a good way - reading), I agree that he should be ignored.

    He clearly has major issues and is lashing out (mainly, one suspects, because of enormous guilt over how he treated his father and family) at the BBC. He hasn't a legal leg to stand but that won't stop a lawyer taking on the case - and his money.

    The overwhelming impression I have is of profound sadness at seeing someone who's clearly wasted his life and is full of bitter resentment acting in such a way. One suspects that the real focus of his cancerous hatred is not his father, nor Doctor Who, but himself.

    How sad.
  • Options
    The GathererThe Gatherer Posts: 2,723
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Thrombin wrote: »
    They also wouldn't be able to broadcast the Day of the Doctor or any other episode of Doctor Who containing the TARDIS!

    I really can't see that happening, to be honest!

    Maybe The Doctor will need to be exiled to Earth again. :)
  • Options
    muntamunta Posts: 18,285
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Wow. Just WOW!

    I've just read the guys rant from Wikipedia dated March 2010

    http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Coburn&oldid=349210042

    He treats the Wiki entry for his dad as his own personal blog/bio of his dads life. But then he goes on a rant to attack anyone who edits the page. He seriously has a major problem.

    However, he claims in that page that his dad had a signed contract from the BBC giving him full rights to all Dr Who elements from "An Unearthly Child" other than the 4 main character names. Well, this should be a simple case then. Produce the signed contract and win the case. Don't produce it and lose.
  • Options
    VopiscusVopiscus Posts: 1,559
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    munta wrote: »
    Wow. Just WOW!

    I've just read the guys rant from Wikipedia dated March 2010

    http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Coburn&oldid=349210042

    He treats the Wiki entry for his dad as his own personal blog/bio of his dads life. But then he goes on a rant to attack anyone who edits the page. He seriously has a major problem.

    However, he claims in that page that his dad had a signed contract from the BBC giving him full rights to all Dr Who elements from "An Unearthly Child" other than the 4 main character names. Well, this should be a simple case then. Produce the signed contract and win the case. Don't produce it and lose.

    Further down, however, he refers to a letter written by his father to the BBC when he left, "granting them unrestricted use of his work on 'Doctor Who' for as long as they liked".

    Game over.
  • Options
    muntamunta Posts: 18,285
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Vopiscus wrote: »
    Further down, however, he refers to a letter written by his father to the BBC when he left, "granting them unrestricted use of his work on 'Doctor Who' for as long as they liked".

    Game over.

    True, he does.:D

    I must admit I skipped over the rants. Not much fun reading someones meltdown!
  • Options
    TEDRTEDR Posts: 3,413
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    DiscoP wrote: »
    If they can't show an Unearthly Child then they should broadcast The Daleks instead, or will the Terry Nation estate kick off about that one?

    It's easy to forget, but that first Daleks story is seven episodes long! If you're anything like me then much more time than you remember is spent in marshes and caves.
    DiscoP wrote: »
    EDIT: Actually if his issue really is with the use of a Police box then they may have to broadcast Attack of the Cybermen! :eek:

    They could just edit the Tardis out — including bleeping any references to it. It's the best plan anybody has ever heard.

    (Or, I guess, The Edge of Destruction would do, being set entirely inside)
  • Options
    Rowan HedgeRowan Hedge Posts: 3,861
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    munta wrote: »
    Wow. Just WOW!

    I've just read the guys rant from Wikipedia dated March 2010

    http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Coburn&oldid=349210042

    He treats the Wiki entry for his dad as his own personal blog/bio of his dads life. But then he goes on a rant to attack anyone who edits the page. He seriously has a major problem.

    However, he claims in that page that his dad had a signed contract from the BBC giving him full rights to all Dr Who elements from "An Unearthly Child" other than the 4 main character names. Well, this should be a simple case then. Produce the signed contract and win the case. Don't produce it and lose.

    That guy has issues that can only be addressed by a good mental health team, for some the internet should be denied.
  • Options
    ThrombinThrombin Posts: 9,416
    Forum Member
    TEDR wrote: »
    They could just edit the Tardis out — including bleeping any references to it. It's the best plan anybody has ever heard.

    (Or, I guess, The Edge of Destruction would do, being set entirely inside)

    If they were going to put off Unearthly Child they'd have to put off the Day of the Doctor and any other episode of Doctor Who, including New Who, featuring a TARDIS. That's not going to happen!

    Unless and until he wins his case there's no point holding off on broadcasting anything.
Sign In or Register to comment.