UPDATE: Since making the video and adding the update, Tweets have surfaced of Stef Coburn denying the Holocaust and praising Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany. Also, he claims that "should anything untoward happen" to him, 'An Unearthly Child's rights will be bequeathed to "The Russian Federation". No, I didn't make a word of that up.
@@tokublwhovianat this point, an unearthly child should be taken back by force. It shouldn’t be held by someone who doesn’t respect what the series stands for.
You don’t know if he actually wrote those tweets tho. It has been known for left wing mobs to hack someone’s account and post things similar to that to garner division. And I think you should get your facts right or discuss the tweets that with the person before you condemn him. That’s very bad form and completely unfair.
The concept of a “Doctor Who family” who created it is amazing to me. Like, Sydney Newman is the Dad, Verity Lambert is the Mum, Waris Hussein is the Gay uncle and Anthony Coburn is like that other uncle who was around for a lot of your childhood but over time you gradually just saw less of him and you pretty much forgot he existed until he died and you were sad but you didn’t really want to go his funeral because his son, your cousin, is a tosser
@CODA834 _Le Docteur Oméga,_ which wasn't even translated into English until the 21st century, rips off HG Wells and Jules Verne far more than Doctor Who rips off from it. There are few similarities to my eyes, and even those seem to be pretty superficial, like having a protagonist called "Doctor". On that basis, Star Trek ripped off _20,000 Leagues Under the Sea_ because the main characters travel in a ship and are both called "Captain" ;)
Poor guy has lost his mind. He's not doing anything but staining the memory of his father by holding work to which he contributed hostage. You're welcome.
@@Si_of_Earth Thanks! My experience lacks a gendered valence of any kind, so I always get the pronouns wrong. That makes navigating the language very difficult for me.
It is a bit sad to see the start of a show created to teach young people and give families something to watch together, hostage of a man who refuses to let go of his ignorance.
"Sad, really, isn't it? People spend all their time making nice things, and other people come along and break them." -- the Doctor, 'Enemy of the World'
They shouldn't have messed up the show with all this woke stuff, it was less noticable at first few gay dudes here and there now its woman doctor and black man doctor (i dont mind since ncuti is a male)
@@Metalffe The show was not messed up by wokeness. It was messed up by poor writing. RTD hired Ncuti because he thought "Ncuti would do well", not because he's black. Ultimately what the Doctor looks like has no bearing on anything. What is your problem with a female or black doctor? Or even just inclusivity in general? I absolutely agree that some writers (possibly including Chibnall) can get so caught up in inclusivity that they forget to write a good story, but inclusivity itself is never a problem on its own. A black or female doctor is a non-issue as long as the writing remains good.
@@MetalffeI'm really sorry for the few braincels trying to do anything inside that head. If you think NOW it's progressive, then you never understood Doctor Who. I remind you that the second Doctor Who arc ever is about evil space naz1s... Daleks hate everything that is not like them. Who looks more like a Dalek in this conversation?
Doctor Who has always been progressive and it's always been political. The difference is it's rarely, if ever, been preachy or patronising, and it's _never_ been intentionally insulting.
Thank you for underlining the point that we shouldn't denigrate Anthony Coburn's contribution to Doctor Who, as I have seen some fans doing. That's just undignified behaviour and its not based in any actual evidence and ultimately makes people look just as bad as this guy...well, not quite, given his horrible views, but the point about dignity still stands
We shouldn't denigrate it, but we should keep it in perspective. By all accounts, given the amount of re-writing that was done on his scripts, his involvement is pretty slight. His name is on the episode credits and that feels like it's enough for me.
Let’s be honest it’s all around the world! Britain, USA, Canada and lots of other places. It’s sickens me to my stomach and I can’t believe that some people are like this
C.E. (Cecil) Webber wrote the very first episode ("An Unearthly Child") almost in its entirety, albeit Anthony Coburn had to make a few tweaks so it would dovetail with the next three "caveman" episodes, which were largely Coburn's work. To be fair, it seems Coburn did come up with the idea of the TARDIS looking like a police-box, but for the first episode _only,_ so it would blend in with its London surroundings. It was actually Verity Lambert who came up with the idea that it would be _stuck_ as a police box for evermore ("We'll just say the controls are broken", she said).
@@christopherhowarth9801 It is according to "Doctor Who, A History" (Alan Kistler, 2013), quote: _"C. E. Webber's script for the [planned] initial story, The Giants, [was finally rejected because] it would be too costly to film... [Anthony] Coburn's cavemen story would now immediately follow the program's first episode, already written by Webber and entitled An Unearthly Child. Coburn adapted this script to work as the opener to his cavemen tale and made some changes"_ _"For the opening story, Coburn thought that the TARDIS should disguise itself as a blue police phone box.... As the police box prop was being built, the concern arose of how expensive it was going to be to replace the time machine every few weeks... To save money and time, Verity Lambert decided to keep reusing the police box model, remarking 'We'll just say the controls are broken'..."._ If there's a problem with that, I suggest you take it up with the author.
As much as it is depressing, I do get a sense of vindication when MrTARDIS drops a new episode of "Clowning on loser bigots trying to ruin the fun for the rest of Doctor Who's fanbase", and I appreciate it. We need more people like you calling out these morons.
Seriously. Not that I have a huge DVD collection myself (mostly because of financial and space constraints) but, streaming is just the 21st century equivalent of cable TV.
Usually I’m all for writers getting credit for their work but A. He is the son of the writer not the actual writer and B. He is clearly repugnant in his opinions and actively going against the morals of the show he is fighting for the rights of. The BBC owes him NOTHING and I cannot believe he is somehow winning.
And also the writer is nkot tje only person who made the episode possible. I don't see why a writer has more rights than a director for example. I thinl rights ultimatley belong with the show and the actual writers etc get a commission when it sells and repeats. But when it comes to their death it ends there. Same with character like the Rani who are now left in Limbo.
@@DamnableReverend 1. Because unfortunately he owns the rights. 2. Absolutely none, but unfortunately he owns the rights. 3. Absolutely nothing, but unfortunately he owns the rights.
Mr Tardis would you consider starting a petition to support the BBC in continuing to make An Unearthly Child available? I’m personally very saddened and upset by this whole debacle. Excellent video from you as always. Fingers crossed 🤞 for a resolution that will ensure this story remains available to all regardless of their politics. 😢
This whole situation is both incredibly hilarious and deeply frustrating. Estates of writers deserve to be paid what they're owed, but it's clear that's not what this situation is. If Stef wanted to honour his father's undeniably important contribution to the show, he could participate in a documentary about Anthony Coburn, go to fan conventions or write a book... so many options. That's how Peter R Newman got the recognition he deserved for Sensorites. So many writers screwed over by the BBC but have had their work and contributions recognised in time. Stef is just a dick. And to make matters worse, Waris Hussein will now be completely cut off any residuals, which probably makes Coburn very happy. At least Carole Ann Ford and William Russell have other episodes. I wouldn't be surprised if this situation means the BBC take co-ownership of the entire Classic era and renegotiates every contract so they have unlimited access to broadcasts and the estate holders get paid the same no matter the platform. If the Nation estate is happy with this iPlayer deal, there is no way that Coburn's claims are anything other than petty asshattery.
The most hated person in the Doctor Who fandom? Not even close to the most hated. That title will always go to Johnathan Powell for cancelling the show in 1989. Doctor Who was off tv for 16 YEARS because of that decision. Gate keeping 4 episodes is peanuts compared to that.
It's the worst possible news ever for DW fans and for the preservation of the show's history. This guy being a gatekeeper for the first serial in an era torn apart by the loss of archive footage is enough to show he's in it for the money more than his father's legacy, let alone his comments on modern Who and his attempt to disrupt the anniversaries as well as other stuff. I can't imagine what he will dispute next in regards to this situation, but if he continues down this path of disrupting gatekeeping without some restraint, he can consider his father's legacy gone (which he doesn't seem to care about). And if his leverage is actually shorter than he thought, then he will have shot himself in the foot.
22:33 I’d just like to say thank you for this point. I got into an argument with someone who said that the Star Wars Special Editions were fine because it’s George’s director’s intent, and I think you summed up my points better than I ever could. I’m not okay with Lucas being able to gatekeep other people’s work for his own vision
Saw that Type 40 took down the first part of their multi-part interview with Stef, wonder if they'll ever repost it or address the situation in the future. After the Holocaust denialism, they might have decided that it wasn't worth the trouble associating with his kind.
On "An Adventure in Time and Space". It wasn't only Anthony Coburn that wasn't acknowledged. I don't think David Whitaker got represented either. I'm guessing this is what happens on TV dramatisations to keep the cast numbers down. As for sports stadiums being "all seeing eyes" or energy transmitters, now there's a plot line worthy of Doctor Who.
I've decided to write a script in which a time machine is disguised as a cat. From now on, any media which features a cat owes me money. That’s how this works, yes?
As it's about discrimination, I'm sure the BBC can sue. And if a million fans rip the story from their DVDs and upload it to RUclips for the duration of the anniversary, the BBC would probably turn a blind eye.
My understanding is he owns the rights to his father's intellectual property as a private individual. He can refuse to give permission for whatever reason he feels like and the BBC can do pretty much nothing legally. The laws regarding discrimination won't apply here.
Leaving aside his other views, Coburn displays all the classic hallmarks of a vexatious litigant. Grandiose pompous language, fixation, delusion, paranoia and inflating a grievance into a crusade against evil on behalf of others. He certainly seems to have rights to the first four part story - the BBC have conceded as much. That his ten year fight over some kind of rights to the TARDIS has come to nothing indicates that no lawyers he has approached have found his claims can be substantiated. Yet he refuses to decouple the two claims - an all or nothing approach is also typical. So that's it really. And practically speaking it's not a problem. The story has been very widely distributed by now and is ahem out in the wild anyway. If the BBC can't prevent piracy a man of straw stands no chance.
This sort of thing typifies why our system of copyright is broken. As it stands Coburn can claim copyright over the Unearthly Child, and everything else his father ever wrote, until the 2040s, twenty more years in which he can gatekeep, profit off, and - by affiliation with his own beliefs - distort his father's legacy, whatever that legacy may be. Posthumous copyright should not be a thing, at least not by default, maybe it should be possible to apply for it if a creator dies soon after creating a thing, to allow the family to make some money. A child, or spouse of a creator, or a a company that acquire the copyright, is not the same as the creator, they do not - necessarily - know the creator's wishes, but so far as the law is concerned they can do what they like with the creator's work, distorting it, restricting it, controlling it. Logically, creative rights should pass away with the creator, not hang around for seventy years to be used and abused by manchildren and nepo-babies.
I normally feel the BBC has treated some of their people like rubbish, but as far as Stef Coburn is concerned, I have no sympathy. He didn't write it and has garbage views. Anthony Coburn's writing was quite good, it's a shame his son's actions are tarnishing Anthony's reputation.
Not to make this political but as an American I am kind of relieved that this Guy Coburn is not an American. Unfortunately, he'd fit in well with the modern Republican Party.
There is a former soccer player who was a sporting legend for the team I support called Matt Le Tissier. Apparently he was always a bit right-wing but never that vocal about it. But now he's taken a very similar turn to this Coburn guy, apparently he tried to claim that the reports of war crimes by Russia in Ukraine were 'media lies'. Some people it seems are just very susceptible to brainwashing, and the key it seems is to convince them they are actually fighting against being brainwashed.
@@lloroshastar6347 I can totally relate to that. Here in the States my team, the Yankees, recently celebrated the 25th anniversary of the championship the 98 team on. Unfortunately, one of the players on that team, David Wells, marred th reunion by making several comments about how players had gone soft and how NIKE, a shoe company, had promoted a WOKE atmospher. I just had to shake my head becuase Nike, just like Bud Light, and other corporate brands and commercial products in our capitalist society are the antithesis of Wokeness. They are the think woke is supposed to be fighting against. To be honest, I don't think I can look at him quite the same way again. He was one of my favorite players on the Yankees and his perfect game, which he tossed while hungover after attending the Saturday Night Live wrap=up party the night before, is the stuff of legend. But the guy himself is just a loser as far as i am concerned.
One thing to note, even if Coburn is able to legally gatekeep these episodes, it won't for very long. His dad died in the 70s, and creative copyright lasts for seventy years following a creator's death, by the 2040s it'll be in the public domain, and the BBC - and anyone else - will have free reign over the Unearthly Child. After that point, the immortality of the creators and actors will be able to stand, freely and perpetually.
I think it differs from nation to nation, but as far as I know (and I don't 100% pretend to understand how everythign works, but I have a little experience with publishing), it'll go to public domain ... so long as someone doesn't register the work. I thinkt eh Coburn estate, if such a thing exists, could probably do that. Intellectual properties like Sherlock Holmes were in a strange legal limbo for a very long time.
There is a campaign by families to have the 70 years extended indefinately. This is because so many families have got fed up with crap versions of characters and stories being curned out as soon as the rights lapse. While I understand and agree with inheritors who have carefully maintained and cared for the integrity of the intellectual property they hold, I don't think that should apply here. Dr Who was such a collaborative effort that it is impossible to identify one person as its creator. Coburn was employed to write a story following the specifications laid down by the BBC Drama Department. Without their commission he would never have written it.
@@zacmumblethunder7466 Personally I disagree with the whole custom of posthumous copyright. The creator's spouse, or child, or whoever, is not the same as the creator, and yet the law assumes they share the creator's vision and interest. Creative copyright should die with the creator, maybe - if the creator dies not long after creation - their heirs might be able to apply for it, but it shouldn't be the default, and certainly shouldn't hang around for another lifetime after the only person with any right to care passes on.
@samuellawrencesbookclub8250 I can see both sides. I've seen children who have taken a real hands-on interest in their inheritance and have put as much creative effort into maintaining the legacy as their parent put into creating it. I see no problem with them retaining rights. But likewise, I've seen beloved creations flogged off by relatives to any passing twerp to make a quick buck.
I had herd about this recently had my local cinema try to put on the unearthly child. but because of this person was unable to put it on. Sounds to me like this has a axe to grind with the world not just the bbc, Think it's a shame a man like him cant see through past his issues and ad least try to help people enjoy the Episode his father wrote,, sadly looks like he just wants to be a grumpy old man Offensive as well . shame really sounds like he does not even care about doctor who but just wants to feed his ego . I mean all the people who where meant have badly treat his father from the bbc will be dead now for god sake
I don't think his dad regardless of his political views would approve of his son being a wacko and tarnishing his dads name, I don't his dad would approve of denying the holocaust, he's clearly using his dad's name for clout and if you ask me it's really scummy to use a dead person with far more Influence on tvs name to cry about shit. Clearly he didn't actually love his dad otherwise he wouldn't ruin his name.
Thanks, Mr. T - watching this has given me a little bit of hope. I won't lie, I felt utterly despondent when the news broke this morning. It truly felt to me as if a bigot had won. However, after listening to you talking about media preservation etc., I'm confident that the BBC won't let this go without a fight - especially considering Stef has no real reason to deny them the rights. I can't imagine 'vengeance' standing up very well in court. In fact, he has said as much in one of his many Twitter ravings!
Written by C.E Webber and Anthony Chambers? Wait so two people hold the copyright to this story? How then can Stef claim ownership of the copyright? Surely at least some of that copyright goes to Webber's descendants?
Thank you for this clear video explaining things, as I've been pretty baffled by things showing up in my feed over the last few days saying things like "An Unearthly Child Lost Forever!". Of course it isn't. But I understand what you mean about the gatekeeping and I think you're right. I'm still a bit confused though. Why don't they just put it on there anyway? DO they really think this younger Coburn has that strong of a case? They must be basing this on more than his egomaniacal ranting. And being the coiner of an aconym isn't the same thing as owning the rights to an entire serial. Just put this guy in his place already! he should be grateful his father's work is being celebrated today. Also pretty crazy that people are using this for an opportunity to crap on Anthony Coburn as he's not around an who knows what he would really think of Stef's actions if he were. I enjoy the serial myself; it's an auspicious beginning to this wonderful series. Coburn's masters of Luxur I have in a scriptbook edition published sometime in (I think) the early 90s, years piror tot he Big Finish version. It's interesting but I can sort of understand why it wasn't made. By coincidence or not, it does bare some similarities to The Daleks (I mean their first serial) and I'm sort of glad we got Nation's instead, for probably-obvious reasons.
It stands to reason that Coburn would have inherited the rights to his father's intellectual property, so he probably does have a pretty cut and dried case. The BBC aren't even trying to dispute it, which you have to imagine they would if they thought they could argue otherwise, and rely on Coburn cutting a pretty unsympathetic figure in any court proceedings to get a judgement in their favour. After all, they managed to get the police box registered as their trademark rather than the Met Police who invented the bloody things.
Actually I'm sorry but no Anthony Coburn shouldn't be in An Adventure in Space and Time. That is a character drama, in which the drama is first priority. His presence would merely be oh look yes that fact of who wrote this episode which isn't at all what this story is about. An Adventure in Space and Time is a beautifully constructed, tight and efficient drama that always uses it's anecdotes to reinforce the emotion and the journey, striking a really smart balance between fact and drama. Throwing things and people in just because they were also there is precisely what it doesn't do and for good reason, because it's primary function is entertainment.
On the bright side i and many people have the entire serial on dvd and I also have piroted copy on my computer, and 3 hard drives. He may technically own it now but he can never destroy it.
@@newman476 piracy isn't always a bad thing. It helps to preserve media by getting it in as many hands as possible. Its why some video games weren't lost forever. People recording the audio off their TV was arguably piracy and selling it at conventions was deffinitely piracy but that's why we have the audio of every lost episode. Its deffinitely a grey issue though
@@thatDamnAusWhoFan I don’t disagree, but I think it’s important to recognize that, in some small part, pirating An Unearthly Child at this point in time is his preferred method of viewing it.
@@newman476 that my friend is the power of fandom. Take star wars for example. Lucas wanted to make it so the special editions were the only versions of the original trilogy you could experience. So various fans got their hands on original prints of the film, and using consumer grade tech scanned every frame, used soft ware to denoise the image and upscale to 4k, and put it out there for everyone to experience. Where the studios and rights holders fail us the fandom always provides, not for money but for love of the franchise
He also encouraged people to commit piracy by loaning out DVDs and making illegal copies. Ngl, encouraging people to commit crimes is not really a good look in court (clean hands and all that)
You know, given what Stef Coburn has done and the long legal battles surrounding the Daleks, I'm amazed the BBC are such wimps when it comes to rights. If the BBC didn't create Doctor Who, the production company would have probably made everyone involved with the show sign over the rights, and if they don't like that, then tough. Sometimes this can be a bad thing (I still won't forgive Warner Bros for not allowing Ken Russell's directors cut of The Devils to get a release), but if that model isn't in place, sometimes shit like this can happen. Also the BBC have been rerunning An Unearthly Child since the 1980s and it has been available to buy since 1990, so what's rattled his cage? Also how was this not laughed out of court, I'm pretty sure the statute of limitations has expired. I've owned the DVD for well over 7 years and now I'm guarding it with my life. Stef Coburn is an evil little waste of sperm, and not just because he's stolen the rights to An Unearthly Child but because of how he behaves full stop.
At this point, it isn't worth fighting for. The copyright claimed by Coburn expires in 2047, 70 years after his father's death, from a business perspective it isn't worth fighting for ownership for only twenty years or so.
@@samuellawrencesbookclub8250 I suppose so, but it's still not right. Besides the story has been rerun since the 80s and has been available to buy since the 90s so why is he acting like a petulant child now (even 10 years ago it was too late). I believe Stef Coburn said he would rather sell the episode to the Russian government before he dies. The guys unhinged.
This is one of the reasons why piracy exists and will never go away. You can still download it and watch it, because it's culture, not just a TV show...
He is just asking for pitch and fork treatment and death threats the way he is going. Everyone who wpuld have wronged him no longer in in the BBC. He is spiting the fans of the show and honestly I have no sympathy for him if he gets what k predict. I don't condone it but it's what he'll end up getting.
I've followed DW for my whole life on TV and through the NA wilderness years and loved that the show has tried to reinvent itself. I was not a fan of the DR/Rose relationship/love story as it was a tad unpalatable for me (y'all will disagree OFC), but i accepted this was the way things were going, and the season arc was anathema to me. (I'm prefer sepeate story's) that sasid..i enjoyed Matt's first season (something borrowerd, something blue still gives me chilld) and LOVED Capaldi's era. I was worried when a female doctor was announced but was a fan of Jodie W and had high hopes. The shows (IMHO) were poor and the 'amazon' episode stands out as an utter misunderstanding of who the DR is as a character, even though the story was interesting...the DR loving a corporation jarred with me.. Although Bradey W was a great companion. The death of his wife was a landmak moment for me. IDGAF if the new DR is black, i just want better stories. I love DR who and why the BBC cannot look to Big Finish for talent and writers baffles me. Listen, this is all my opinion. No hate here. I want every season to be great and tune in until the show decides it's not for me. It's hard, because I want to like everything WHO, even some of the dreadful (7th/8th novelisations) I still wrestle with 20 years after reading. Be kind, all this is written with love of WHO. x
Sounds to me like Stef has some real emotional issues he needs to see a therapist about. He’s literally having a full on mental breakdown in front of our eyes.
I feel sorry for the whole crew of AUC, and I also feel sorry for RTD - one of his stipulations for returning to Doctor Who was this whole iPlayer thing. It would have been the first time the whole available back catalogue of Doctor Who was available to watch under one roof - a brilliant deal for the consumer, and a logistical triumph. Sad it's an even less complete collection now, but still looking forward to streaming the other classic stories.
16:17 a head start at what? If they’re already millionaires there isn’t much money in it, and if I was a millionaire, I’d probably just sell it back to the BBC anyway
It's a bad investment anyway, Coburn (the father) died in the 70s, his copyright - whatever the extent of it may be - is due to expire 70 years after his death, so the 2040s. You're not gonna make much money from it in 20 years
If he wanted to ‘stick it’ to bbc then licence it to another channel temporarily. He would get money which is clearly what he wants. From his POV he feels his dad is owned more recognition, maybe the bbc could have done little biopics on all the creators including his dad. And accepted the license. Do we know why he was left out of An adventure in Space and Time? Was it done in response to his son withholding the licence?
The guy seems mentally ill and still grieving his dad. But equally, I think the BBC makes a lot of money from Doctor. Who. Just pay the man what he wants and he'll go away and hopefully get the help he clearly needs.
Children should not inherit rights to artistic properties. IP rights are the devil. Royalties should be paid out the beneficiaries of the creators; not the same as having property rights. Put all of that in the public domain.
He's comparing his father to gary Lineker (as the current highest paid BBC presenter). But that's to ignore the fact that if Lineker left the BBC he could doubtless get a higher paid job at any commercial channel. (plus that Gary Lineker is the symbol of BBC "wokeness" since he made tweets criticising the UK government on asylum seekers - so I strongly suspect it's too much reading the Daily Mail that puts Lineker in his mind)
I find it very funny that a guy who seemingly loves the idea of traditional british culture, is keeping it from everyone. Like if you love white people so much show us the "superiority" of your father's writing.
I try not to speak about the person but the claim, and I believe him that the BBC mistreated his dad. Unfortunately, that is the situation (as we saw in the complicated deals with Terry Nation Estate and a non-who case when some estate refused the right from someone because they don't like his view). I believe that if the fans had supported him and acknowledged his pain, he would have been more compromised, but when the internet came to him and wrote him the opposite, they don't care, and he should give the right just because it feels like him against the world. I think that this is why 2013 was different from now personally, I would advance to Stef that if he doesn't want to sell to the BBC, that is alright, but only if he will sell to, let's say, ITV instead that way, It is not in the hands of the BBC, but fans can watch it.
I think he should be sent to court for this. Want to write ti the BBC about this. And that he supports Hitlers reign gets me really rield up. I had to see all of what the jews had to go through at the Holocost Museum. And after while I couldn't take it anymore and I ran out of there as fast as I could crying. I actually ran through the whole museum cying. It was heartbreaking for me.... and yet to hear about someone who actually denounces and supports that reign and terror.... and to be the son of someone who not only has a grudge against the BBC but is also the son of one of the people who worked on it..... it feels personal to me. I hate him.
I don't know if you mentioned it live but it wasn't even the real first story. The first story was supposed to be Planet of the Giants but it was 'rejected due to its technical complexity and lack of character development.' And he didn't care that his son died.
They don't they own the doctor and the police box[ Both the time machine and the actual box because The Metropolitan Police tried to sew or somethand the court decided that since they no longer make police boxes. But doctor who is still doctor who b b c gets that license] and most other stuff But they don't own everything some stuff still belongs to its original creator The daleks Belong to The estate of terry nation their creator for example Rights and copyright in all that stuff are just strange
I don't get the Adventure in Space and Time criticism. That wasn't about the creation of Doctor Who, it was about William Hartnell. Don't recall any of the writers being name-checked (been a while since I watched it) because they weren't the focus.
From what I've been reading, this guy sounds truly unhinged. One person I saw comment on Reddit did suggest however if the original Pilot would be under the same constraints as The Tribe of Gum which would be a weird, yet do-able workaround?
It's kind of a self own. "Bwahaha! The BBC will be unable to use the first four episodes which after the opening ten minutes of introductions and brief Dr who lore exposition are a forgettable caveman adventure that doesn't really effect much of anything going forward. I on the other hand will win by receiving... No royalties. Oh wait.. am I gonna lose out actually. No surely not." Like it'll be sad to not have the story but the BBC could literally just add a title card explaining the setup to the Dalek story and noone would be that confused. It's not a big loss like if say the Terry Nation, Kit Pedler or Terrance Dicks estates refused to play ball.
The first episode Amazing and introduced two of the most iconic villain races in the series Time lords in humanity Because The doctor was antagonistic and the main "bad" guys Are obviously human
UPDATE: Since making the video and adding the update, Tweets have surfaced of Stef Coburn denying the Holocaust and praising Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany. Also, he claims that "should anything untoward happen" to him, 'An Unearthly Child's rights will be bequeathed to "The Russian Federation".
No, I didn't make a word of that up.
Jesus Christ… ol’ Stef has lost the plot now, he needs raiding and locking up fast!
@@tokublwhovianat this point, an unearthly child should be taken back by force.
It shouldn’t be held by someone who doesn’t respect what the series stands for.
He would make a good Dalek.
@@Private-Potatoi agree.
You don’t know if he actually wrote those tweets tho. It has been known for left wing mobs to hack someone’s account and post things similar to that to garner division. And I think you should get your facts right or discuss the tweets that with the person before you condemn him. That’s very bad form and completely unfair.
Finally. A Doctor Who villian outside of the programne not called Micheal Grade.
It's a spin-off!!!
The concept of a “Doctor Who family” who created it is amazing to me. Like, Sydney Newman is the Dad, Verity Lambert is the Mum, Waris Hussein is the Gay uncle and Anthony Coburn is like that other uncle who was around for a lot of your childhood but over time you gradually just saw less of him and you pretty much forgot he existed until he died and you were sad but you didn’t really want to go his funeral because his son, your cousin, is a tosser
That’s the perfect analogy.
David Whittaker is the awesome cousin who ties all the family together.
favourite comment lol
@CODA834 _Le Docteur Oméga,_ which wasn't even translated into English until the 21st century, rips off HG Wells and Jules Verne far more than Doctor Who rips off from it. There are few similarities to my eyes, and even those seem to be pretty superficial, like having a protagonist called "Doctor". On that basis, Star Trek ripped off _20,000 Leagues Under the Sea_ because the main characters travel in a ship and are both called "Captain" ;)
Its dumb, we arent child ffs "the fam" lmao its so lame.
Poor guy has lost his mind. He's not doing anything but staining the memory of his father by holding work to which they contributed hostage.
Poor guy has lost his mind. He's not doing anything but staining the memory of his father by holding work to which he contributed hostage.
You're welcome.
@@Si_of_Earth
Thanks! My experience lacks a gendered valence of any kind, so I always get the pronouns wrong. That makes navigating the language very difficult for me.
@@aleatoriac7356it's ok. You are in a safe, loving space and you are seen and heard.
It is a bit sad to see the start of a show created to teach young people and give families something to watch together, hostage of a man who refuses to let go of his ignorance.
A lot of things the state calls "ignorance" is nothing more than noticing patterns of behaviour ((they)) don't want you to
@@Sillimant_ alright bub head on back to 4chan
@@Sillimant_ Spoken like the classic lunatic who follows subreddits centered on conspiracy theories.
to be honest, i didn't bother answering and neither should you two. people like that only want the attention.
@@Sillimant_that double bracket thing gives you a way. Your opinion can be safely ignored, Timothy.
"Sad, really, isn't it? People spend all their time making nice things, and other people come along and break them." -- the Doctor, 'Enemy of the World'
They shouldn't have messed up the show with all this woke stuff, it was less noticable at first few gay dudes here and there now its woman doctor and black man doctor (i dont mind since ncuti is a male)
@@Metalffe The show was not messed up by wokeness. It was messed up by poor writing. RTD hired Ncuti because he thought "Ncuti would do well", not because he's black.
Ultimately what the Doctor looks like has no bearing on anything.
What is your problem with a female or black doctor? Or even just inclusivity in general? I absolutely agree that some writers (possibly including Chibnall) can get so caught up in inclusivity that they forget to write a good story, but inclusivity itself is never a problem on its own. A black or female doctor is a non-issue as long as the writing remains good.
@@alansmithee419 i dont care, i wouldn't have really noticed it if they didnt gender swap him fuck
@@MetalffeI'm really sorry for the few braincels trying to do anything inside that head.
If you think NOW it's progressive, then you never understood Doctor Who.
I remind you that the second Doctor Who arc ever is about evil space naz1s... Daleks hate everything that is not like them. Who looks more like a Dalek in this conversation?
Doctor Who has always been progressive and it's always been political. The difference is it's rarely, if ever, been preachy or patronising, and it's _never_ been intentionally insulting.
Coburn referred to Verity Lambert as a "Jewess" in the replies on his tweet, so yeah, good guess about the antisemitism
Thank you for underlining the point that we shouldn't denigrate Anthony Coburn's contribution to Doctor Who, as I have seen some fans doing. That's just undignified behaviour and its not based in any actual evidence and ultimately makes people look just as bad as this guy...well, not quite, given his horrible views, but the point about dignity still stands
We shouldn't denigrate it, but we should keep it in perspective. By all accounts, given the amount of re-writing that was done on his scripts, his involvement is pretty slight. His name is on the episode credits and that feels like it's enough for me.
I think his real agenda was to make The Daleks the first story of Doctor Who, since he seems to be one.
Stef would make a good dalek
Stef Coburn needs mental help. I hope there's someone that cares for him enough to help him get it.
The problem, is that I doubt he'll get it. I mean, one cannot really help a person who doesn't want help.
@@costelinha1867 Depending on context you sometimes can. But it at the very least becomes *way* harder.
He won't get it. Probably not self aware that he needs help.
You know he's bad when even ian levine hates him
I hate the racism in this country so much
Let’s be honest it’s all around the world! Britain, USA, Canada and lots of other places. It’s sickens me to my stomach and I can’t believe that some people are like this
C.E. (Cecil) Webber wrote the very first episode ("An Unearthly Child") almost in its entirety, albeit Anthony Coburn had to make a few tweaks so it would dovetail with the next three "caveman" episodes, which were largely Coburn's work. To be fair, it seems Coburn did come up with the idea of the TARDIS looking like a police-box, but for the first episode _only,_ so it would blend in with its London surroundings. It was actually Verity Lambert who came up with the idea that it would be _stuck_ as a police box for evermore ("We'll just say the controls are broken", she said).
That's not true at all.
@@christopherhowarth9801 It is according to "Doctor Who, A History" (Alan Kistler, 2013), quote:
_"C. E. Webber's script for the [planned] initial story, The Giants, [was finally rejected because] it would be too costly to film... [Anthony] Coburn's cavemen story would now immediately follow the program's first episode, already written by Webber and entitled An Unearthly Child. Coburn adapted this script to work as the opener to his cavemen tale and made some changes"_
_"For the opening story, Coburn thought that the TARDIS should disguise itself as a blue police phone box.... As the police box prop was being built, the concern arose of how expensive it was going to be to replace the time machine every few weeks... To save money and time, Verity Lambert decided to keep reusing the police box model, remarking 'We'll just say the controls are broken'..."._
If there's a problem with that, I suggest you take it up with the author.
@@christopherhowarth9801so what's true then? The burden of proof is in your hands.
The racist Stef must have blown his top whenever the fugitive Doctor made het appearances
As much as it is depressing, I do get a sense of vindication when MrTARDIS drops a new episode of "Clowning on loser bigots trying to ruin the fun for the rest of Doctor Who's fanbase", and I appreciate it. We need more people like you calling out these morons.
True. I’m pretty Damn conservative but this is just petty and stupid
I have it on dvd this is exactly why people should still be buying dvds then you can watch it and own it
Seriously. Not that I have a huge DVD collection myself (mostly because of financial and space constraints) but, streaming is just the 21st century equivalent of cable TV.
Usually I’m all for writers getting credit for their work but A. He is the son of the writer not the actual writer and B. He is clearly repugnant in his opinions and actively going against the morals of the show he is fighting for the rights of. The BBC owes him NOTHING and I cannot believe he is somehow winning.
it is quite baffling. Why are they listening to this guy's ranting? What good has he ever done? What did *he* write?
And also the writer is nkot tje only person who made the episode possible. I don't see why a writer has more rights than a director for example.
I thinl rights ultimatley belong with the show and the actual writers etc get a commission when it sells and repeats. But when it comes to their death it ends there. Same with character like the Rani who are now left in Limbo.
@@DamnableReverend
1. Because unfortunately he owns the rights.
2. Absolutely none, but unfortunately he owns the rights.
3. Absolutely nothing, but unfortunately he owns the rights.
Mr Tardis would you consider starting a petition to support the BBC in continuing to make An Unearthly Child available? I’m personally very saddened and upset by this whole debacle. Excellent video from you as always. Fingers crossed 🤞 for a resolution that will ensure this story remains available to all regardless of their politics. 😢
Unfortunate if Stef Coburn doesn't want to cooperate there's nothing they can do.
Surely even if he has a leg to stand on, the BBC could still show the first episode, as it was co-authored by C.E Webber
Probably not, the BBC's freelancer contracts were a bit loosely written.
This whole situation is both incredibly hilarious and deeply frustrating. Estates of writers deserve to be paid what they're owed, but it's clear that's not what this situation is.
If Stef wanted to honour his father's undeniably important contribution to the show, he could participate in a documentary about Anthony Coburn, go to fan conventions or write a book... so many options. That's how Peter R Newman got the recognition he deserved for Sensorites. So many writers screwed over by the BBC but have had their work and contributions recognised in time. Stef is just a dick.
And to make matters worse, Waris Hussein will now be completely cut off any residuals, which probably makes Coburn very happy. At least Carole Ann Ford and William Russell have other episodes. I wouldn't be surprised if this situation means the BBC take co-ownership of the entire Classic era and renegotiates every contract so they have unlimited access to broadcasts and the estate holders get paid the same no matter the platform. If the Nation estate is happy with this iPlayer deal, there is no way that Coburn's claims are anything other than petty asshattery.
Hussein also did Marco Polo but that's (likely) not going to be on iplayer.
“Asshattery”, using that, thank you
@@joshsobchak9902because Marco Polo is gone.
I really want to know what Anthony Coburn’s opinions on Warris were because if they’re nothing like his son’s I gotta really question what happened?
The record for how quick someone can become the most hated person in the doctor who fandom.
The most hated person in the Doctor Who fandom? Not even close to the most hated. That title will always go to Johnathan Powell for cancelling the show in 1989. Doctor Who was off tv for 16 YEARS because of that decision. Gate keeping 4 episodes is peanuts compared to that.
@@acurisurtrue, but everyone seems to credit Michael Grade for that.
It's the worst possible news ever for DW fans and for the preservation of the show's history. This guy being a gatekeeper for the first serial in an era torn apart by the loss of archive footage is enough to show he's in it for the money more than his father's legacy, let alone his comments on modern Who and his attempt to disrupt the anniversaries as well as other stuff. I can't imagine what he will dispute next in regards to this situation, but if he continues down this path of disrupting gatekeeping without some restraint, he can consider his father's legacy gone (which he doesn't seem to care about). And if his leverage is actually shorter than he thought, then he will have shot himself in the foot.
22:33 I’d just like to say thank you for this point. I got into an argument with someone who said that the Star Wars Special Editions were fine because it’s George’s director’s intent, and I think you summed up my points better than I ever could. I’m not okay with Lucas being able to gatekeep other people’s work for his own vision
I love it. You quoted it "We can all make fire. The Unearthly Child is one of my favorites both in the pilot and the actual full story.
I think like with the Tardis lawsuit in the early 2000s the BBC will win.
Great, he's a bloody Dalek.
Picks off The Beginning dvd boxset ftom shelf, puts disc into series x, enjoys show with no issues. Lol
Doing the same thing myself😁
Saw that Type 40 took down the first part of their multi-part interview with Stef, wonder if they'll ever repost it or address the situation in the future. After the Holocaust denialism, they might have decided that it wasn't worth the trouble associating with his kind.
On "An Adventure in Time and Space". It wasn't only Anthony Coburn that wasn't acknowledged. I don't think David Whitaker got represented either. I'm guessing this is what happens on TV dramatisations to keep the cast numbers down. As for sports stadiums being "all seeing eyes" or energy transmitters, now there's a plot line worthy of Doctor Who.
Send a pitch to Russell lol
@@Myne1001 I was thinking of doing so but then I realized that The Shakespeare Code was based on the same idea.
In a month or two this will be resolved and this will be a bizarre blip that we look back on and laugh at. But it's gonna be a ROUGH month or two
I've decided to write a script in which a time machine is disguised as a cat. From now on, any media which features a cat owes me money. That’s how this works, yes?
(7:18) but Doctor Who Magazine did a whole article on him for their 50th anniversary celebrations!!!
As it's about discrimination, I'm sure the BBC can sue. And if a million fans rip the story from their DVDs and upload it to RUclips for the duration of the anniversary, the BBC would probably turn a blind eye.
My understanding is he owns the rights to his father's intellectual property as a private individual. He can refuse to give permission for whatever reason he feels like and the BBC can do pretty much nothing legally. The laws regarding discrimination won't apply here.
@@Sir_Gerald_Nosehairs.The dislike is for the situation, not your reply. Anyway, am sure the BBC are trying to figure it out.
Leaving aside his other views, Coburn displays all the classic hallmarks of a vexatious litigant. Grandiose pompous language, fixation, delusion, paranoia and inflating a grievance into a crusade against evil on behalf of others. He certainly seems to have rights to the first four part story - the BBC have conceded as much. That his ten year fight over some kind of rights to the TARDIS has come to nothing indicates that no lawyers he has approached have found his claims can be substantiated. Yet he refuses to decouple the two claims - an all or nothing approach is also typical. So that's it really. And practically speaking it's not a problem. The story has been very widely distributed by now and is ahem out in the wild anyway. If the BBC can't prevent piracy a man of straw stands no chance.
The BBC should just publish it anyway and see if he can afford better lawyers if he decides to sue
This sort of thing typifies why our system of copyright is broken. As it stands Coburn can claim copyright over the Unearthly Child, and everything else his father ever wrote, until the 2040s, twenty more years in which he can gatekeep, profit off, and - by affiliation with his own beliefs - distort his father's legacy, whatever that legacy may be.
Posthumous copyright should not be a thing, at least not by default, maybe it should be possible to apply for it if a creator dies soon after creating a thing, to allow the family to make some money. A child, or spouse of a creator, or a a company that acquire the copyright, is not the same as the creator, they do not - necessarily - know the creator's wishes, but so far as the law is concerned they can do what they like with the creator's work, distorting it, restricting it, controlling it. Logically, creative rights should pass away with the creator, not hang around for seventy years to be used and abused by manchildren and nepo-babies.
The bbc should just sue. Hell disney too, this guy is annoying lol
I wish somebody would offer me £20k for something I had F-all to do with.
I normally feel the BBC has treated some of their people like rubbish, but as far as Stef Coburn is concerned, I have no sympathy. He didn't write it and has garbage views. Anthony Coburn's writing was quite good, it's a shame his son's actions are tarnishing Anthony's reputation.
Not to make this political but as an American I am kind of relieved that this Guy Coburn is not an American. Unfortunately, he'd fit in well with the modern Republican Party.
There is a former soccer player who was a sporting legend for the team I support called Matt Le Tissier. Apparently he was always a bit right-wing but never that vocal about it. But now he's taken a very similar turn to this Coburn guy, apparently he tried to claim that the reports of war crimes by Russia in Ukraine were 'media lies'. Some people it seems are just very susceptible to brainwashing, and the key it seems is to convince them they are actually fighting against being brainwashed.
@@lloroshastar6347 I can totally relate to that. Here in the States my team, the Yankees, recently celebrated the 25th anniversary of the championship the 98 team on. Unfortunately, one of the players on that team, David Wells, marred th reunion by making several comments about how players had gone soft and how NIKE, a shoe company, had promoted a WOKE atmospher. I just had to shake my head becuase Nike, just like Bud Light, and other corporate brands and commercial products in our capitalist society are the antithesis of Wokeness. They are the think woke is supposed to be fighting against. To be honest, I don't think I can look at him quite the same way again. He was one of my favorite players on the Yankees and his perfect game, which he tossed while hungover after attending the Saturday Night Live wrap=up party the night before, is the stuff of legend. But the guy himself is just a loser as far as i am concerned.
One thing to note, even if Coburn is able to legally gatekeep these episodes, it won't for very long. His dad died in the 70s, and creative copyright lasts for seventy years following a creator's death, by the 2040s it'll be in the public domain, and the BBC - and anyone else - will have free reign over the Unearthly Child. After that point, the immortality of the creators and actors will be able to stand, freely and perpetually.
I think it differs from nation to nation, but as far as I know (and I don't 100% pretend to understand how everythign works, but I have a little experience with publishing), it'll go to public domain ... so long as someone doesn't register the work. I thinkt eh Coburn estate, if such a thing exists, could probably do that. Intellectual properties like Sherlock Holmes were in a strange legal limbo for a very long time.
There is a campaign by families to have the 70 years extended indefinately. This is because so many families have got fed up with crap versions of characters and stories being curned out as soon as the rights lapse. While I understand and agree with inheritors who have carefully maintained and cared for the integrity of the intellectual property they hold, I don't think that should apply here.
Dr Who was such a collaborative effort that it is impossible to identify one person as its creator. Coburn was employed to write a story following the specifications laid down by the BBC Drama Department. Without their commission he would never have written it.
@@zacmumblethunder7466 Personally I disagree with the whole custom of posthumous copyright. The creator's spouse, or child, or whoever, is not the same as the creator, and yet the law assumes they share the creator's vision and interest. Creative copyright should die with the creator, maybe - if the creator dies not long after creation - their heirs might be able to apply for it, but it shouldn't be the default, and certainly shouldn't hang around for another lifetime after the only person with any right to care passes on.
@samuellawrencesbookclub8250 I can see both sides. I've seen children who have taken a real hands-on interest in their inheritance and have put as much creative effort into maintaining the legacy as their parent put into creating it. I see no problem with them retaining rights. But likewise, I've seen beloved creations flogged off by relatives to any passing twerp to make a quick buck.
"Do not spend your pity on me. Save it for our enemies, for they do not know what they have begun"
I missed the stream, but angry you disturbs me
I had herd about this recently had my local cinema try to put on the unearthly child. but because of this person was unable to put it on. Sounds to me like this has a axe to grind with the world not just the bbc, Think it's a shame a man like him cant see through past his issues and ad least try to help people enjoy the Episode his father wrote,, sadly looks like he just wants to be a grumpy old man Offensive as well . shame really sounds like he does not even care about doctor who but just wants to feed his ego . I mean all the people who where meant have badly treat his father from the bbc will be dead now for god sake
Really I thought the shows creator was Sydney Newman as Coburn was one of 10 writers
I don't think his dad regardless of his political views would approve of his son being a wacko and tarnishing his dads name, I don't his dad would approve of denying the holocaust, he's clearly using his dad's name for clout and if you ask me it's really scummy to use a dead person with far more Influence on tvs name to cry about shit.
Clearly he didn't actually love his dad otherwise he wouldn't ruin his name.
I wonder if Anthony would disown his own son for all his BS if he were alive today..?
Thanks, Mr. T - watching this has given me a little bit of hope. I won't lie, I felt utterly despondent when the news broke this morning. It truly felt to me as if a bigot had won. However, after listening to you talking about media preservation etc., I'm confident that the BBC won't let this go without a fight - especially considering Stef has no real reason to deny them the rights. I can't imagine 'vengeance' standing up very well in court. In fact, he has said as much in one of his many Twitter ravings!
I don't usually advocate for big corporations, but I hope the BBC invokes the wrath of God himself and absolutely obliterates this man in civil court.
They blame every thing on everyone but themselves
Looks like Type 40 pulled their podcast of Stef's extended rant/interview from RUclips. I wonder why. :)
I now feel happy about collecting the series on dvd
Written by C.E Webber and Anthony Chambers? Wait so two people hold the copyright to this story? How then can Stef claim ownership of the copyright? Surely at least some of that copyright goes to Webber's descendants?
I was thinking that
Oh crap, i better send my DVD back before he comes knocking at my door to collect it
Thank you for this clear video explaining things, as I've been pretty baffled by things showing up in my feed over the last few days saying things like "An Unearthly Child Lost Forever!". Of course it isn't. But I understand what you mean about the gatekeeping and I think you're right.
I'm still a bit confused though. Why don't they just put it on there anyway? DO they really think this younger Coburn has that strong of a case? They must be basing this on more than his egomaniacal ranting. And being the coiner of an aconym isn't the same thing as owning the rights to an entire serial. Just put this guy in his place already! he should be grateful his father's work is being celebrated today.
Also pretty crazy that people are using this for an opportunity to crap on Anthony Coburn as he's not around an who knows what he would really think of Stef's actions if he were.
I enjoy the serial myself; it's an auspicious beginning to this wonderful series. Coburn's masters of Luxur I have in a scriptbook edition published sometime in (I think) the early 90s, years piror tot he Big Finish version. It's interesting but I can sort of understand why it wasn't made. By coincidence or not, it does bare some similarities to The Daleks (I mean their first serial) and I'm sort of glad we got Nation's instead, for probably-obvious reasons.
It stands to reason that Coburn would have inherited the rights to his father's intellectual property, so he probably does have a pretty cut and dried case. The BBC aren't even trying to dispute it, which you have to imagine they would if they thought they could argue otherwise, and rely on Coburn cutting a pretty unsympathetic figure in any court proceedings to get a judgement in their favour. After all, they managed to get the police box registered as their trademark rather than the Met Police who invented the bloody things.
He probably should have just left it at 'pittance' rather than unwittingly confirm he thought the offer of £20,000 was insultingly low
Actually I'm sorry but no Anthony Coburn shouldn't be in An Adventure in Space and Time. That is a character drama, in which the drama is first priority. His presence would merely be oh look yes that fact of who wrote this episode which isn't at all what this story is about. An Adventure in Space and Time is a beautifully constructed, tight and efficient drama that always uses it's anecdotes to reinforce the emotion and the journey, striking a really smart balance between fact and drama. Throwing things and people in just because they were also there is precisely what it doesn't do and for good reason, because it's primary function is entertainment.
On the bright side i and many people have the entire serial on dvd and I also have piroted copy on my computer, and 3 hard drives. He may technically own it now but he can never destroy it.
Unfortunately he encourages people to pirate it. He wants people to see it, but he doesn’t want the BBC to make money off of it.
@@newman476 piracy isn't always a bad thing. It helps to preserve media by getting it in as many hands as possible. Its why some video games weren't lost forever. People recording the audio off their TV was arguably piracy and selling it at conventions was deffinitely piracy but that's why we have the audio of every lost episode. Its deffinitely a grey issue though
@@thatDamnAusWhoFan I don’t disagree, but I think it’s important to recognize that, in some small part, pirating An Unearthly Child at this point in time is his preferred method of viewing it.
@@newman476 that my friend is the power of fandom. Take star wars for example. Lucas wanted to make it so the special editions were the only versions of the original trilogy you could experience. So various fans got their hands on original prints of the film, and using consumer grade tech scanned every frame, used soft ware to denoise the image and upscale to 4k, and put it out there for everyone to experience. Where the studios and rights holders fail us the fandom always provides, not for money but for love of the franchise
I agree. This is why we need archivists .
He also encouraged people to commit piracy by loaning out DVDs and making illegal copies.
Ngl, encouraging people to commit crimes is not really a good look in court (clean hands and all that)
Frankly this story can be found online. It's been available for decades. So I doubt he can stop any of us watch this. Or from sharing files.
You know, given what Stef Coburn has done and the long legal battles surrounding the Daleks, I'm amazed the BBC are such wimps when it comes to rights. If the BBC didn't create Doctor Who, the production company would have probably made everyone involved with the show sign over the rights, and if they don't like that, then tough. Sometimes this can be a bad thing (I still won't forgive Warner Bros for not allowing Ken Russell's directors cut of The Devils to get a release), but if that model isn't in place, sometimes shit like this can happen.
Also the BBC have been rerunning An Unearthly Child since the 1980s and it has been available to buy since 1990, so what's rattled his cage? Also how was this not laughed out of court, I'm pretty sure the statute of limitations has expired.
I've owned the DVD for well over 7 years and now I'm guarding it with my life.
Stef Coburn is an evil little waste of sperm, and not just because he's stolen the rights to An Unearthly Child but because of how he behaves full stop.
At this point, it isn't worth fighting for. The copyright claimed by Coburn expires in 2047, 70 years after his father's death, from a business perspective it isn't worth fighting for ownership for only twenty years or so.
@@samuellawrencesbookclub8250 I suppose so, but it's still not right. Besides the story has been rerun since the 80s and has been available to buy since the 90s so why is he acting like a petulant child now (even 10 years ago it was too late).
I believe Stef Coburn said he would rather sell the episode to the Russian government before he dies. The guys unhinged.
@@samuellawrencesbookclub8250I’m not waiting 20 + years to add season 1 to the classic series Blu-ray boxset collection
This is one of the reasons why piracy exists and will never go away. You can still download it and watch it, because it's culture, not just a TV show...
With you 100%, that man disgusts me! Great video as always ❤❤❤
Coburn is no Gene Roddenberry.
He’s no Bob Kane either
Surely the bbc can counter this on the ground of him being clinically insane
He is just asking for pitch and fork treatment and death threats the way he is going. Everyone who wpuld have wronged him no longer in in the BBC. He is spiting the fans of the show and honestly I have no sympathy for him if he gets what k predict. I don't condone it but it's what he'll end up getting.
I've followed DW for my whole life on TV and through the NA wilderness years and loved that the show has tried to reinvent itself. I was not a fan of the DR/Rose relationship/love story as it was a tad unpalatable for me (y'all will disagree OFC), but i accepted this was the way things were going, and the season arc was anathema to me. (I'm prefer sepeate story's) that sasid..i enjoyed Matt's first season (something borrowerd, something blue still gives me chilld) and LOVED Capaldi's era. I was worried when a female doctor was announced but was a fan of Jodie W and had high hopes. The shows (IMHO) were poor and the 'amazon' episode stands out as an utter misunderstanding of who the DR is as a character, even though the story was interesting...the DR loving a corporation jarred with me.. Although Bradey W was a great companion. The death of his wife was a landmak moment for me. IDGAF if the new DR is black, i just want better stories. I love DR who and why the BBC cannot look to Big Finish for talent and writers baffles me. Listen, this is all my opinion. No hate here. I want every season to be great and tune in until the show decides it's not for me. It's hard, because I want to like everything WHO, even some of the dreadful (7th/8th novelisations) I still wrestle with 20 years after reading. Be kind, all this is written with love of WHO. x
I'll forever be grateful I bought the Beginning boxset so i can watch An Unearthly Child
This is all rather sad. Stef sounds like a troubled man.
If the BBC had excepted his deal he'd have then turned around and donated the money to Donald Trump.
Sounds to me like Stef has some real emotional issues he needs to see a therapist about. He’s literally having a full on mental breakdown in front of our eyes.
The story is 60 years old it should belong to culture.
I feel sorry for the whole crew of AUC, and I also feel sorry for RTD - one of his stipulations for returning to Doctor Who was this whole iPlayer thing. It would have been the first time the whole available back catalogue of Doctor Who was available to watch under one roof - a brilliant deal for the consumer, and a logistical triumph. Sad it's an even less complete collection now, but still looking forward to streaming the other classic stories.
I wonder if anyone told Stef that his dad was easily outwritten by Robert Holmes, Malcolm Hulke, and Douglas Adams.
16:17 a head start at what? If they’re already millionaires there isn’t much money in it, and if I was a millionaire, I’d probably just sell it back to the BBC anyway
It's a bad investment anyway, Coburn (the father) died in the 70s, his copyright - whatever the extent of it may be - is due to expire 70 years after his death, so the 2040s. You're not gonna make much money from it in 20 years
I wonder why people like this are allowed on prominent social media platforms like Twitter.
Been less tough on them since Elon bought it and branded it to X.
If he wanted to ‘stick it’ to bbc then licence it to another channel temporarily. He would get money which is clearly what he wants. From his POV he feels his dad is owned more recognition, maybe the bbc could have done little biopics on all the creators including his dad. And accepted the license. Do we know why he was left out of An adventure in Space and Time? Was it done in response to his son withholding the licence?
We should all now list our Unearthly Child (Tribe of Gum) dvds for obscene sums.
Perhaps obscenely low sums, undercut the bugger
I'm holding on to mine.
@@rassilontdavros3004 me too, but if someone wants to give me £1000 for it I'd really have to consider!
@@samuellawrencesbookclub8250 true but then someone might buy it and you'd have to say goodbye
The guy seems mentally ill and still grieving his dad. But equally, I think the BBC makes a lot of money from Doctor. Who. Just pay the man what he wants and he'll go away and hopefully get the help he clearly needs.
Children should not inherit rights to artistic properties. IP rights are the devil. Royalties should be paid out the beneficiaries of the creators; not the same as having property rights. Put all of that in the public domain.
I’m glad they didn’t pay him. He can’t withhold it from torrent sites
He's comparing his father to gary Lineker (as the current highest paid BBC presenter). But that's to ignore the fact that if Lineker left the BBC he could doubtless get a higher paid job at any commercial channel. (plus that Gary Lineker is the symbol of BBC "wokeness" since he made tweets criticising the UK government on asylum seekers - so I strongly suspect it's too much reading the Daily Mail that puts Lineker in his mind)
you are brilliant mate. thnak you
I find it very funny that a guy who seemingly loves the idea of traditional british culture, is keeping it from everyone. Like if you love white people so much show us the "superiority" of your father's writing.
Thank you for being an Ally , this is a Dark world right now , this man needs a reality check !
I try not to speak about the person but the claim, and I believe him that the BBC mistreated his dad.
Unfortunately, that is the situation (as we saw in the complicated deals with Terry Nation Estate and a non-who case when some estate refused the right from someone because they don't like his view). I believe that if the fans had supported him and acknowledged his pain, he would have been more compromised, but when the internet came to him and wrote him the opposite, they don't care, and he should give the right just because it feels like him against the world.
I think that this is why 2013 was different from now
personally, I would advance to Stef that if he doesn't want to sell to the BBC, that is alright, but only if he will sell to, let's say, ITV instead
that way, It is not in the hands of the BBC, but fans can watch it.
I think he should be sent to court for this. Want to write ti the BBC about this. And that he supports Hitlers reign gets me really rield up. I had to see all of what the jews had to go through at the Holocost Museum. And after while I couldn't take it anymore and I ran out of there as fast as I could crying. I actually ran through the whole museum cying. It was heartbreaking for me.... and yet to hear about someone who actually denounces and supports that reign and terror.... and to be the son of someone who not only has a grudge against the BBC but is also the son of one of the people who worked on it..... it feels personal to me. I hate him.
An Uncooperative Manchild
I don't know if you mentioned it live but it wasn't even the real first story. The first story was supposed to be Planet of the Giants but it was 'rejected due to its technical complexity and lack of character development.'
And he didn't care that his son died.
How does the BBC not own Doctor Who? Why do they need to license the episodes? They own Doctor Who.
They don't they own the doctor and the police box[ Both the time machine and the actual box because The Metropolitan Police tried to sew or somethand the court decided that since they no longer make police boxes. But doctor who is still doctor who b b c gets that license] and most other stuff
But they don't own everything some stuff still belongs to its original creator
The daleks Belong to The estate of terry nation their creator for example
Rights and copyright in all that stuff are just strange
27:58 "Don't you think you're being rather high-handed young man?" Very apposite...
Is there an earlier example of sci-fi that still has a significant presence in pop culture?
Quatermass. Lost In Space. Forbidden Planet. I mean, you can argue about the relative significance of those and how present they still are.
Will the BBC still have the rights to release the DVD ?
The show will still be here in 2047 when his rights expire, we can wait.
I don't get the Adventure in Space and Time criticism. That wasn't about the creation of Doctor Who, it was about William Hartnell. Don't recall any of the writers being name-checked (been a while since I watched it) because they weren't the focus.
From what I've been reading, this guy sounds truly unhinged. One person I saw comment on Reddit did suggest however if the original Pilot would be under the same constraints as The Tribe of Gum which would be a weird, yet do-able workaround?
It's kind of a self own.
"Bwahaha! The BBC will be unable to use the first four episodes which after the opening ten minutes of introductions and brief Dr who lore exposition are a forgettable caveman adventure that doesn't really effect much of anything going forward. I on the other hand will win by receiving... No royalties. Oh wait.. am I gonna lose out actually. No surely not."
Like it'll be sad to not have the story but the BBC could literally just add a title card explaining the setup to the Dalek story and noone would be that confused. It's not a big loss like if say the Terry Nation, Kit Pedler or Terrance Dicks estates refused to play ball.
The first episode Amazing and introduced two of the most iconic villain races in the series
Time lords in humanity
Because The doctor was antagonistic and the main "bad" guys Are obviously human
So what episodes would be lost
Wonderful coverage in this!
Darn, I was not aware Laurence Fox went alt-right. I liked him in Inspector Lewis. Alas.