I had such an experience, on a very small scale. My LA partner (I was in LA too, at the time) and I decided that we waned to adapt THEY MIGHT BE GIANTS - from the original movie (it had been a failed play on the West End by James Goldman.) We approached our MT workshop leaders, since we were writing in conjunction with that organization, and they recommended we proceed even though we did not have rights from the Newman-Foreman Co. or James Goldman to do it. The simple argument they proffered was: "what's it gonna hurt?" If it stinks, you don't need the rights and if it's good, the film company may agree to a license. (Secretly we worried of the unspoken concern: "if it's good, they can license it to better known authors and not us."
Fearlessly, we spent 2.5 years writing, workshopping, tossing some material, rewriting or writing anew to get a draft that passed muster in this large, professional LA writers workshop. We went so far as to mount a single professional reading at the Dorothy Chandler pavilion. Through all, we had no reason to ask permission, there was no public or for-profit aspect of our efforts that threatened court action.
However, within 18 months, we got a request to license the show for production in Salem, MA and thus the calls began - beginning with Goldman's NYC agent. Once he learned what our call was about, he refused to take it. The MA producer tried to reach James, then actually spoke to William Goldman - in hopes he could intervene. Finally, I had the good fortune to be chatting with Sidney Poitier's producing partner (also in my office building) who new Goldman's agent well, and he made a call to him - explaining he was putting me on to talk about obtaining rights. The moment I got on, his secretary intercepted the call, informing me he had to take another call and I would need to call back. It was useless. We tried all we could to get permission and were blocked from having any meaningful conversation. The MA project became a revue highlighting just the songs from that and one another show of ours. No copyright laws were breached. And after that we gave up and moved on to other works.
Jump forward 35 years and all became clear after reading FINISHING THE HAT by Sondheim. Apparently, we were not the only folks who thought the work could be a musical (and ours was a terrific musical.) Sondheim had approached his pal, James, about developing it and Goldman emphatically said no. It was a work of his that he swore would never be adapted (at least while he or his family controlled it.) Instead they wrote FOLLIES. And us, we got to sit on a terrific, fully developed and tested musical that could not possibly see production til 1961 + 75 years (and that's the play copyright, not the movie.) But, as a movie adaptation 1971 + 75 years = 2026. And so, for all that effort, we sit and wait to see if we survive this deadline. (Or if we care anymore to see that work produced.)
I don't think the advice we were given was wrong. We used the opportunity to develop our skills and obtain a lot of professional recognition and respect for the quality of what we wrote. Yeah, we didn't get that show produced, but the project did provide other opportunities of a kind. The best part of the work, our songs, exist where they might not otherwise. And we could outlive the copyright restrictions, allowing us (but, alas, everyone else) to produce it.
As a litigious American, I’m astonished they were allowed to get this far without impediment.
I had such an experience, on a very small scale. My LA partner (I was in LA too, at the time) and I decided that we waned to adapt THEY MIGHT BE GIANTS - from the original movie (it had been a failed play on the West End by James Goldman.) We approached our MT workshop leaders, since we were writing in conjunction with that organization, and they recommended we proceed even though we did not have rights from the Newman-Foreman Co. or James Goldman to do it. The simple argument they proffered was: "what's it gonna hurt?" If it stinks, you don't need the rights and if it's good, the film company may agree to a license. (Secretly we worried of the unspoken concern: "if it's good, they can license it to better known authors and not us."
Fearlessly, we spent 2.5 years writing, workshopping, tossing some material, rewriting or writing anew to get a draft that passed muster in this large, professional LA writers workshop. We went so far as to mount a single professional reading at the Dorothy Chandler pavilion. Through all, we had no reason to ask permission, there was no public or for-profit aspect of our efforts that threatened court action.
However, within 18 months, we got a request to license the show for production in Salem, MA and thus the calls began - beginning with Goldman's NYC agent. Once he learned what our call was about, he refused to take it. The MA producer tried to reach James, then actually spoke to William Goldman - in hopes he could intervene. Finally, I had the good fortune to be chatting with Sidney Poitier's producing partner (also in my office building) who new Goldman's agent well, and he made a call to him - explaining he was putting me on to talk about obtaining rights. The moment I got on, his secretary intercepted the call, informing me he had to take another call and I would need to call back. It was useless. We tried all we could to get permission and were blocked from having any meaningful conversation. The MA project became a revue highlighting just the songs from that and one another show of ours. No copyright laws were breached. And after that we gave up and moved on to other works.
Jump forward 35 years and all became clear after reading FINISHING THE HAT by Sondheim. Apparently, we were not the only folks who thought the work could be a musical (and ours was a terrific musical.) Sondheim had approached his pal, James, about developing it and Goldman emphatically said no. It was a work of his that he swore would never be adapted (at least while he or his family controlled it.) Instead they wrote FOLLIES. And us, we got to sit on a terrific, fully developed and tested musical that could not possibly see production til 1961 + 75 years (and that's the play copyright, not the movie.) But, as a movie adaptation 1971 + 75 years = 2026. And so, for all that effort, we sit and wait to see if we survive this deadline. (Or if we care anymore to see that work produced.)
I don't think the advice we were given was wrong. We used the opportunity to develop our skills and obtain a lot of professional recognition and respect for the quality of what we wrote. Yeah, we didn't get that show produced, but the project did provide other opportunities of a kind. The best part of the work, our songs, exist where they might not otherwise. And we could outlive the copyright restrictions, allowing us (but, alas, everyone else) to produce it.