Board Thread:Spoilers!/@comment-2153169-20171129175600/@comment-2153169-20180114154440

CoolDudeAl wrote: Lady Junky wrote: CoolDudeAl wrote: Lady Junky wrote: CoolDudeAl wrote: Lady Junky wrote: CoolDudeAl wrote: JennaMae wrote: IMDB has Cory Rempel as "Clayton." Interesting. Originally Tarzan is a Clayton as well, so this could actually be Tarzan (or maybe his cursed persona). The actor looks right for the role.

If anyone wants, here is the IMDB page:

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4534019/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t11

And here is the page for the Tarzan story:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarzan_of_the_Apes

And here we go x)

Before we speculate too much, Disney lost the rights of Tarzan years ago. They can't use it. Well, I'm sure they could get the rights, if they really wanted. They got Peter Pan rights, even if it took a year. And Tarzan isn't something that is in that high of demand that the owner of the rights wouldn't be willing to give out rights for a tv show, especially if they get money for it. That's different. Not like they never had them. Disney LOST the rights. They had them, and they lost them. And they never tried to get them back since then, not even for a live-action... so I doubt they'd try to get them for OUAT x) Plus, as for now, the rights belong to Warner Bros. A film was just released in 2016, so nope. Disney did not get the rights back so soon, just for OUAT ^^

At best, the name will be a nod, like Rufio. But, it can't be an adaptation of Tarzan ^^

Disney never lost the rights to Peter Pan, they just need to be allowed to expand the character drastically ^^ From what I understand about Tarzan rights, the owner is very protective, so they don't just give the rights out, but "rent" them out per project. So (unless you have something that proves otherwise) Warner Bros. doesn't have the rights either, they were just given them to make a movie. That's not that easy, unfortunately. Per deal, you can't just give the rights like that when someone is already using them. Does not work like that ^^ Disney had the rights for a certain number of years, then they lost them per deal, and they never tried to get them back. That's a fact.

Basically, the deal was that Disney owns the rights for a certain number of years. In that number of years, they did two films, a tv series and videogames. That's all. So, as of today, OUAT can't adapt the Tarzan story, as Disney does not have these rights.

IDK exactly deal with Warner Bros, but it is likely something similar. We may not like this situation, but it is like that ^^' Even if Warner Bros. did some kind of contract, it may have been for movie rights only. Once, of course, is a tv show so would not infringe on WB's movie rights. Furthurmore, I just did a bit of research, it seems that some early Tarzan and John Carter of Mars (Burrogh's two major franchises) books have fallen into public domain. A comic book company was using the characters from those public domain stories in 2012, and even though ERB Inc. tried to fight it, they had to settle in the end, and allow the comics to continue, so it seems that technically Once wouldn't have to clear Tarzan with anyone, as long as they stick to what is in the public domain books.

Not all Tarzan books are in the public domain ^^ And, even if they can legally, it is possible that Disney does not allow it, cos of these rights things. Indeed, Disney's Tarzan is what we can called "a derivative work".

Per copyright laws, even if it is a work in the public domain, any time someone creates a new adaptation, the copyright on everything they added gets set to zero years.

So, to use Tarzan, OUAT would need to adapt it - but it'd need to be completely free of ALL Disney-related elements that Disney created and added in its adaptation. So again, would Disney allow OUAT to adapt Tarzan without any nod to the Disney film... ? That's another story :/