- The Daily Munch
- Posts
- 🪄 Warner Bros. sued because of Harry Potter
🪄 Warner Bros. sued because of Harry Potter
PLUS: DC and Marvel Lose "Superhero" Trademarks; OpenAI expects a $5 billion loss this year.
Jacob Goldschein & Steven Van
September 30, 2024 • Estimated Reading Time: 9 minutes
Today’s market performance 🏆️
S&P 500: +0.42% 📈
Nasdaq 100: +0.26% 📈
Dow 30: +0.04% 📈
Russell 2000: +0.22% 📈
In partnership with
TOP STORY
🪄 Warner Bros. sued because of Harry Potter
📸 AP
Warner Bros. can’t seem to catch a break right now.
On the same day that legendary actress Maggie Smith, a.k.a. Professor McGonagall, passed away, Warner Bros. was hit with a lawsuit from Sky Group.
On Friday, Sky Group sued Warner Bros. for breach of contract, accusing the studio of refusing to partner on the upcoming “Harry Potter” TV series.
📉 Warner Bros ($WBD) stock is down -69.46% in the past 5 years.
📸 Warner Bros/Courtesy Everett Collection
A brief timeline:
2021: Sky and Warner enter an agreement that “requires Warner Bros. to offer four Max series per year to be co-financed and co-produced by Sky, with the shows being distributed exclusively to Sky viewers in the UK and other European territories.”
April 2023: Warner Bros. publicly announced the upcoming “Harry Potter” TV series, generating excitement about its potential release.
May 2023: Sky executives contacted Warner Bros. to inquire why the "Harry Potter" series had not been offered to Sky under their partnership.
Warner Bros. executives claimed the series wasn’t officially ordered or greenlit yet, so it didn’t fall under the co-financing deal with Sky despite publicly announcing that the series was coming out.
💬 The Harry Potter film series has grossed over $9.6 billion globally, making it the fourth-highest-grossing film franchise of all time.
The Harry Potter book series has sold more than 600 million copies worldwide, making it the best-selling book series.
📸 Bloomberg
So, Warner announced the show, with a deal already in place with Sky, and then just ghosted them? Seems odd and also very costly.
Warner's refusal to include the "Harry Potter" series in their agreement will reportedly cost Sky hundreds of millions of dollars.
Why, Warner? “Warner’s reason for refusing to honor its obligations to Sky could not be more clear. Warner has chosen to keep the Harry Potter series for itself and make the blockbuster series the cornerstone of its own Max rollout in Europe.”
Damn, Sky is really running Warner Bros.'s name through the mud.
💬 Max's rollout in Europe, including the "Harry Potter" series, is planned for 2026, with Max launching in the UK that same year.
📉 Comcast ($CMCSA), the parent company of Sky News, is down -6.55% in the past 5 years.
What does Warner Bros. have to say for themselves?
The studio says the claims are absolute rubbish, calling the lawsuit “a baseless attempt by Sky and Comcast to gain leverage.”
They argue it's simply a tactic to gain some leverage in ongoing negotiations for Warner Bros. content because the two sides' current deal expires in 2025.
Who could blame 'em for wanting more Harry Potter?
After all, it is the best series of all time.
💬 “We know HBO-branded shows are critical to Sky, as evidenced by their desire for over a year to find a way to renew our agreements, and this lawsuit makes it clear that Sky is deeply concerned about the viability of its business were it to lose our award-winning content.”
FROM OUR FRIENDS @ 1440 MEDIA
If you're frustrated by one-sided reporting, our 5-minute newsletter is the missing piece. We sift through 100+ sources to bring you comprehensive, unbiased news—free from political agendas. Stay informed with factual coverage on the topics that matter.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
🔴 OpenAI expects a $5 billion loss this year
📸 Joel Saget / Getty Images
Amid political turmoil and controversy, we just found out that OpenAI is also expected to lose $5 billion this year.
Oh god, Sam (Altman), what is going on, man? Earlier this week, CNBC confirmed that OpenAI expects about $5 billion in losses on $3.7 billion in revenue this year.
That’s a whole lotta money, and I don’t really know what to do with it.
💬 OpenAI generated $300 million in revenue last month, up 1,700% since the beginning of last year.
The company expects to bring in $11.6 billion in sales next year.
Isn’t making billions a good thing? Why the significant loss?
Making a ton on the top line (revenue) is a great thing, but it doesn’t tell the whole story.
Despite its hundreds of millions of monthly users and billions in revenue, OpenAI is still not making much profit because of the massive costs associated with developing advanced AI models, research, infrastructure, and talent.
So, despite ChatGPT’s rapid ascension, OpenAI’s business model is still far from profitability.
But there’s no need to fear; OpenAI’s path to eventual profitability is very similar to that of most successful tech startups: high revenue and low margins in the beginning.
Don’t worry; their profit time will come.
💬 OpenAI is currently pursuing a funding round that would value the company at more than $150 billion.
WORD OF THE DAY
What’s the term used to describe how fast you can sell something and turn it into cash? 💰 |
ENTERTAINMENT
🦸 DC and Marvel lose "Superhero" trademarks
📸 CBR
In a shocking move, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has canceled the long-held joint trademark of the word "Superhero."
This very well may be the biggest bombshell of the entire year.
Marvel and DC Comics first registered the trademark for “Superhero” in 1977 and have successfully defended it on multiple occasions.
But now, they’re gonna lose their claim on the word.
How did this happen?
Two words: Superbabies Limited.
Superbabies is a small company that produces a series of comics about, you guessed it, superhero babies.
Seems like a dope company to me, but to DC, eh, not so much?
DC “attempted to block Richold’s efforts to promote The Super Babies” because they thought the company infringed on their superhero trademark.
So, Superbabies creator S.J. Richold decided to challenge the two comic giants’ claim to the trademarks.
And with help from the law firm RJLF, he won the case by arguing that words like "Superhero" are too common to be trademarked.
DC and Marvel didn’t even bother to respond to the challenge by the July 24th deadline, so the court had no choice but to rule in favor of Superbabies Limited.
Meaning “Superheros” for all!
Did you enjoy this post?All feedback helps us improve the quality of this newsletter :) |
Reply