I won't be too specific, but the very worst comment was quite abusive and it suggested that Ken's facial expressions were indicative of a certain debilitating condition. This person also derided Ken's chances in a BBC audition for the part.

No need for such personal attacks and I can understand why such a comment would be moderated out. It is a shame that a small number of FMs feel the need to make such attacks, but that is the nature of the Internet.

However, his post still seems to display a complete lack of insight into the infringement of copyright question.

And, more specifically, Doctor Who fandom.

I have noticed that they seem to be leaving the Daleks well alone.

Obviously they aren't afraid of the BBC and UNICEF, but are scared of upsetting the Terry Nation estate...

The BBC has always been tolerant of fan reconstructions of missing episodes and low quality fan films. Why it was only recently Doctor Who Magazine featured reports on a number of fan films, including a very delayed one that has John Pertwee reprising the Third Doctor in a cameo. There's nothing significantly different about this fan film. So why would the Beeb act differently?

BTW, it's NOT illegal. They're not making money and therefore not breaking any criminal law. Copyright infringement is a civil matter.

I suggest you check your facts. Breaching copyright is a matter of civil law and is by definition illegal.

As the matter has been referred to the BBC, it remains to see what happens next. Personally, based on what I have seen so far, I do not feel sufficient interest in the project to watch it, should it remain available.

Most fan films are just one-offs with a few fans having a lark in a TARDIS made of boxes or something. Looking at the trailer for Doctor Who 2009, however, it would seem this series of 13 full episodes matches the production quality of many of the films shown legitimately on Zone Horror. (Not sure if that's praise or criticism.) It's being webcast for free on a site called doctorwho2009.com and some fans have even suggested it will act as a substitute for the series we're not getting this year.

Also, Doctor Who 2009 is quite blatantly being used as a showreel for the talents involved. They're open about it:

It may be non-profit, but it's obviously being made to further the careers of those involved.

All fan films breach copyright, profit-making or not. Don't even try to suggest otherwise. Some projects have the goodwill of the copyright holder, but that can be revoked at any time. For me, the most surreal aspect of Doctor Who 2009 is the producers' determination to steam ahead without even confirming the fragile goodwill of BBC Wales.

The site has now been updated. The disingenuous claim of support for UNICEF is still there and they have added hyperlinks to BBC Shop, Warner Bros. and UNICEF.

Contrary to what RTD would have you believe, Doctor Who is still a functioning show without Daleks. The copyright wouldn't exactly be the hard bit - they'd have to buy the functioning props (which are near impossible for fans to get) and find a good voice actor!

There is no way the BBC are going to let this continue. If they were making a few trailers or a little set of shorts and such they'd get away with this, but they're making a series. They won't let it happen. If they do let it happen, then they are surrendering they're copyright and they won't be able to protect the asset they make huge amounts of cash from.

This is unlike something like the Half Life : Escape from City 17 videos for example. Each of these are a few minutes long, and aren't giving us full stories using recognisable individual characters. The Half Life videos are taking an existing medium from one format (video games) and taking it to something that it hasn't been seen in before (movies/video) where the rights aren't currently available. As such the people who own Half Life (Valve Games) have shown support to it, as it almost acts like a show-reel to show how a movie of the video game could be done. It acts as a show case for the creators too, but they encourage indie talents at Valve, and are more than happy to see this kind of thing happen.

This is just making a version of the show, and slapping the copyrighted logos and designs of the BBC on it. They won't stand for it, and it will, quite rightly, be taken down for taking the concept of fan-made films and bastardising it.

Before:

After:

LOLasaurus Rex!

Unbelievably petty. "A bit low"? You could walk under a duck whilst wearing a top hat. I can't think of any reason why an open-minded individual would react in such a way apart from pure spite.


What "concept" are you referring to? Your comment makes no sense but I imagine you believe DW2009 is a professional product masquerading as an amateur production?

I know a lot of the moaners here are under the misapprehension that this is a "rival" to bona fide Doctor Who but they should really open their eyes. The guy making it has a fancy CGI package at his disposal but that's it. He hasn't actually made a TARDIS set - it's just a trick. The Ice Warrior in the trailer is just as bad as anything BBV ever came up with!

The level of vitriol displayed by some posters on this forum is disgusting and unjustifiable. I'd understand if we were being asked to pay for the privilege of watching DW2009 but we're not - there's the option of totally ignoring it (which I intend to do as Doctor Who made by "fans" is inevitably sub-standard).

If all the pompous "BBC copyright champions" here really want a surprise - and all the DW2009 fans want to be shown that it's not as unique as they thought - I suggest you look into "Victimsight"...

Hmmm, new forum member, decides to post on this topic, wouldn't happen to be "the guy with the fancy cgi package" would it?

There is nothing to stop someone creating whatever they want, still think the beeb will stop it though, especially if Mofffat is planning to use the ice warriors in Season 5.

I doubt anyone seriously regards DW2009 as a rival to the official series. The production values and performances fall somewhere between BBV and Garth Marenghi’s Darkplace.

I actually wouldn't mind seeing it. I'm just surprised at the naivety and bloody cheek of people thinking they can webcast 13 full-length episodes on a site called doctorwho2009.com and get away with it. (Never mind the quality, look at the width.)

Oh yes, and the UNICEF claim is really taking the piss.

The addition of 'No infringement intended' or variations thereon does not act as a magic 'get out of jail free' card.

These people have been at best naïve in their approach.

BBC have been known to act on a lot less. In the circumstances pointing out copyright issues can hardly be called pompous.

As for the quality of DW2009, I concur with Be More Pacific. Still not impressed enough to watch any more, even if the BBC decides not to do anything.

As for Victimsight, much the same arguments apply as regard copyright, tho I note there aren't any BBC logos around.

Just cos something is widespread doesn't make it right.

:yawn: The usual 2 + 2 = 5 paranoia. I'm also the Rani!


BBV's "Professor and Ace/Alice" series lasted for a couple of years before the BBC had a word and that was available commercially.


I dragged "Victimsight" into the argument because some of the girls on this thread are under the misapprehension that DW2009 is somehow unique. Fans have been making their own (bad) versions of the series for decades and I've never seen all this "I'm telling the BBC on you" until now.

I had a flick through the website last night and was interested to see just how little "meat" there is - either there or, on further exploration, the project's Facebook page.

In sum, I saw the main trailer and the team's reproductions of three "classic" scenes that have been sulking (see what I did there?) around YouTube for months; there were a few photos that would have been taken when shooting the main trailer; and that's it. Am I missing something?

Beyond episode titles and the clips mentioned above, I don't get the impression there has been much in the way of delivery so far. So, regardless of the project's rights and wrongs, I reckon that it is unlikely that four episodes of "Doctor Who 2009" will be produced, let alone 13.

nyingy

That's why I'm surprised by some of the posts on this thread - there's very little actual product to get one's knickers in a twist about.


The series - should there be one - doesn't start until April so that's not surprising. The guy plans to release a story per month (according to DWF) so - at thirteen episodes - it looks like "Doctor Who 2009" will actually conclude in 2010!

Oh I don't know, I seem to remember the BBC had enough trouble, and they were going down legitimate clearance paths!


But then, how many fan-made films use the current DW logo (could be opening up a floodgate on that one, but I'll wait and see) and the logos of a charity or two for humanitarian purposes and last beyond one episode?

Victimsight looks like a typical fan film: Self-made graphics, and a single episode, with the production values of a 1982 episode of Why Don't You?.

That's simply not true. BBV's "Professor and Ace" adventures were released between May and November 1998. The BBC forced them to change the names to the Dominie and Alice for the remaining adventures.

If you want a reason why the BBV Time Travellers series ended altogether, you need look no further than Big Finish's legitimate audio adventures, also featuring McCoy and Aldred. The compromised copy became redundant.

I'm most terribly sorry that I over-estimated the length of time the series ran for and I obviously wasn't clear in my post - I was referring to the BBC asking that the character's names be changed and not that the series be cancelled.

Thank you so much for cutting off the rest of the post and making it look like I'm crazy. The fact remains that obtaining fully working full-scale dalek props and a Nicholas Briggs equivalent is going to be a tad harder for a low budget fan production than it was for the BBC, and would be a bigger reason not to have Daleks than the potential wrath of Mrs Nation, especially when they're likely to have every other DW copyright holder after them anyways

Sorry, it wasn't my intention to quote you out of context (and i've edited your post again, sorry!) , but its not as if the original quote isn't there for everyone to read, and I did put an ellipsis at the end to signify that there was more to the comment than what I was quoting. Everything you said outside of that is fair comment, and it reminds me of something that occurred to me earlier about what the current owners of the Cybermen rights have to say about their use in the video that, I believe, uses cyberman voice changer masks for heads.

There are at least three unrelated ongoing fan series based on the Star Trek licence. CBS allows these and obviously doesn't think it'll affect its ability to protect its crown jewel asset. So I don't see the BBC having any problems either.

Even though Star Trek: New Voyages / Phase II is obviously unlicensed, there appears to be a healthy relationship between its producers and CBS. Some companies such as CBS and DC Comics just happen to take a relaxed attitude to fan films. The BBC, however, is not renowned for its goodwill toward those who use its trademarks without permission: http://entertainment.timesonline.co....cle3926859.ece

The BBC may tolerate a few little skits on YouTube, but I doubt it will tolerate a website showcasing full episodes made by highly creative individuals (writers, actors and behind the scenes crew) many of whom either do this sort of thing for their day job or are hoping to carve out a career in their area of expertise. I suspect Doctor Who 2009's ambitious aim to bring many young professionals into the spotlight will be its undoing.