have i read jackson contract? of course not but do you seriously believe in this day and age jackson or jacksons agent would have accepted a contract that was offering profit participation without there being any provision for jackson to be able audit the books and check they were keeping everythig above board?

who in their right mind would accept points in a deal but not have anything in there to make sure they could check it?

even my friends tiny little band have the right to audit their record label … it si a standard term in most modern day entertainment contracts and onyl an idiot wouldn;lt protect themselves without having and audit clause.

it goes both ways as well…I am sure new line have a audit clause on jackson production team and weta.

it is an industry standard.

Never agreed with the bizarre stance you’ve always taken on this John…when you rant on about the Peter Jackson fanboys swallowing anything, Methinks Thou Dost Protest Too much, you’ve swung so far the other way that something as blatant as your above post (and Kudos for that, there were several other movements in this case that were not covered here) still has you only grudgingly seeing things from the other side.

Ahh well. Just opinion like everything else.

Who told you the right to audit was in his contract? Where did you hear this?

jackson contractually had the right to have the audit done.

new line allowed a partial audit to be done on dvd sales of fellowship the ring. the accountants found some irregularities and then requested a full audit to which new line pretty much said go fuck yourself.
you say jackson wasn’t prepared to talk to them….whats to talk about?

jackson even said he was happy for a completely non bias third party to handle the audit and new line still refused.

so how did he refuse to come to the party?

this all could have been avoided if new line were not acting so shady.i would like to see how you acted towards people you trusted who you think may have fucked you out of millions john.

WHEN IS YOUR MONEY YOU DONT ACT RATIONALLY

is like if you find out your girlfriend is cheating on you.
Someone on the outside can easly tell you to be calm and its not that big a deal but when its you in that postion its a whole differnt story

“the whole point of this and what the judge just ruled is that were not private or confidential and that jackson had every right to have them audited. its a very standard thing to have done.”

They are private and confidential and New Line had every legal right to refuse to let Jackson have them. That’s exactly why it took a judges order. It was not illegal for New Line to refuse an audit at all. But in civil action a judge can order you to produce things that are otherwise private.

For example, if I ask you for copies of your medical history, you have every right to say “NO”. BUT, if we get into a legal argument (over something where your medical history might be relevant) a Judge can order you to produce those documents. After you produce them, and Judge may or may not allow them to be used, but that is their discretion.

New Line is under NO obligation to produce its books to anyone it doesn’t choose to produce them to. Period.

I’m not going to debate with you about your flawed opinion of Jackson’s conduct since we’re just repeating ourselves from ages old debates ;) But on this legal question, you’re quite wrong.

you call them confidential propriety book and private books?

the whole point of this and what the judge just ruled is that were not private or confidential and that jackson had every right to have them audited. its a very standard thing to have done.

it was never a case of “don’t you know who i am”. that had nothing to do with it.
it was more a case of “why are you borderline breaking the law and what are you hiding”

please…what made him a douche exactly? the fact that he is fucked off that it looks like the people to whom he delivered their most successful films ever have more than likely ripped him off??
and please use better than arguments then calling someone a blind fanboy because the facts have been ppretty clear from the get go.

jacksons team did a partial audit. they noticed some irregularities in new lines accounting so they requested a full audit which is well within their rights as this judge has just shown. new line said no and (illegally) refused to let jacksons team audit.
then jackson came out and said he was more than happy for an third party independant team to handle the audit and that he would gladly accept whatever they find. new line again said no.

exactly what was so bad with what jackson did? i just don’t see where he acted like a douche?

However I’m quite sure that this wouldn’t be the first time a studio is caught acting suspiciously or being dishonest.