Skip to main content
https://www.highperformancecpmgate.com/rgeesizw1?key=a9d7b2ab045c91688419e8e18a006621

A big ruling against Fox raises concerns of ‘self-dealing’ with Hulu

An arbitrator has awarded $179 million in damages to the stars and creative team behind the Fox show “Bones.”

As laid out in an in-depth Hollywood Reporter story, the ruling could have bigger implications for the streaming world, particularly as the major media companies are looking to launch their own streaming services, which will presumably take advantage of their existing content libraries.

Stars David Boreanaz and Emily Deschanel, along with executive producer Barry Josephson and Kathy Reichs (who wrote the novels that “Bones” was based on), sued 21st Century Fox in 2015. They alleged that the Fox studio licensed the show for below-market rates to Fox networks and later to Hulu, cheating them out of their rightful share of the profits.

The dispute ultimately went into arbitration. Now arbitrator Peter Lichtman has ordered Fox (which currently owns a 30 percent stake in Hulu, and is in the process of being acquired by Disney) to pay one of the largest profit-sharing awards in Hollywood history.

As part of his ruling (embedded below), Lichtman examines Fox’s deal to stream “Bones” reruns on Hulu. These kinds of deals — where studios sell content to a corporate sibling — aren’t unusual, but the company is still expected to pay fair market value.

It seems, in this case, that Hulu was only giving Fox a share of ad revenues, something that Lichtman describes skeptically: “So, when Fox contends that there is no evidence of a better deal struck by another studio in terms of the percentage of ad revenue, this is true because no other studio would make such a deal based on the percentage of ad revenue” (emphasis in the original).

Lichtman then moves on to what he calls “perhaps the most shocking piece of evidence related to the Hulu issues,” namely the fact that executive Dan Fawcett signed the licensing agreement on behalf of both Fox and Hulu.

“As stated above, Mr. Fawcett literally signed the agreement for both parties in his representative capacity for both sides,” Lichtman writes. “The obvious inferences of self-dealing, conflict of interest and the lack of any arm’s length negotiations leap off the page.”

Ultimately, Lichtman concludes that there’s one obvious reason why Hulu got such a good deal.

“It is undisputed that the Fox conglomerate had an equity stake in Hulu, and the evidence established that ‘Fox writ large’ essentially handed over the digital rights at a low cost to build up value of that enterprise,” he says.

Fox, meanwhile, is challenging the ruling and arguing that most of the damages should be avoided.

“The ruling by this private arbitrator is categorically wrong on the merits and exceeded his arbitration powers,” the company said in a statement. “Fox will not allow this flagrant injustice, riddled with errors and gratuitous character attacks, to stand and will vigorously challenge the ruling in a court of law.”

Regardless of how this case plays out, it probably won’t be the last time Hollywood talent challenges the studios over streaming profits.

Update: Disney has provided the following statement from CEO Bob Iger:

[Fox executives] Peter Rice and Dana Walden are highly respected leaders in this industry, and we have complete confidence in their character and integrity. Disney had no involvement in the arbitration, and we understand the decision is being challenged and will leave it to the courts to decide the matter.

Bones arbitrarion ruling by TechCrunch on Scribd

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How the world’s largest cannabis dispensary avoids social media restrictions

Planet 13 is the world’s largest cannabis dispensary. Located in Las Vegas, blocks off the Strip, the facility is the size of a small Walmart. By design, it’s hard to miss. Planet 13 is upending the dispensary model. It’s big, loud and visitors are encouraged to photograph everything. As part of the cannabis industry, Planet 13 is heavily restricted on the type of content it can publish on Instagram, Facebook and other social media platforms. It’s not allowed to post pictures of buds or vapes on some sites. It can’t talk about pricing or product selection on others.   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by Morgan Celeste SF Blogger (@bayareabeautyblogger) on Jan 25, 2020 at 7:54pm PST Instead, Planet 13 encourages its thousands of visitors to take photos and videos. Starting with the entrance, the facility is full of surprises tailored for the ‘gram. As a business, Planet 13’s social media content is heavily restricted a...

Uber co-founder Garrett Camp steps back from board director role

Uber co-founder Garrett Camp is relinquishing his role as a board director and switching to board observer — where he says he’ll focus on product strategy for the ride hailing giant. Camp made the announcement in a short Medium post in which he writes of his decade at Uber: “I’ve learned a lot, and realized that I’m most helpful when focused on product strategy & design, and this is where I’d like to focus going forward.” “I will continue to work with Dara [Khosrowshahi, Uber CEO] and the product and technology leadership teams to brainstorm new ideas, iterate on plans and designs, and continue to innovate at scale,” he adds. “We have a strong and diverse team in place, and I’m confident everyone will navigate well during these turbulent times.” The Canadian billionaire entrepreneur signs off by saying he’s looking forward to helping Uber “brainstorm the next big idea”. Camp hasn’t been short of ideas over his career in tech. He’s the co-founder of the web 2.0 recommendatio...

Billionaire clothing dynasty heiress launches Everybody & Everyone to make fashion sustainable

Veronica Chou’s family has made its fortune at the forefront of the fast fashion business through investments in companies like Michael Kors and Tommy Hilfiger . But now, the heiress to an estimated $2.1 billion fortune is launching her own company, Everybody & Everyone , to prove that the fashion industry can be both environmentally sustainable and profitable. There’s no argument about the negative impacts of the fashion industry on the environment. The textiles industry primarily uses non-renewable resources — on the order of 98 million tons per year. That includes the oil to make synthetic fibers, fertilizers to grow cotton, and toxic chemicals to dye, treat, and produce the textiles used to make clothes. The greenhouse gas footprint from textiles production was roughly 1.2 billion tons of CO2 equivalent in 2015 — more than all international flights and maritime shipments combined (and a lot of those maritime shipments and international flights were hauling clothes). The lit...