WB Lawyers Going After Harry Potter Prop Collectors?

Greetings all:
I am new to the forum as you can see (this is my second post). In my first post, I just sent a general polling question to the forum to see if there were any Harry Potter collectors here and the response sounded a lot like a dull thud. That either means that: 1.) there are very few HP collectors here, or 2.) there are many HP collectors here, but it has all been discussed before and they no longer feel chatty, or 3.) HP prop collectors have been forced to fly under the radar since they are being actively pursued by WB.
My experience with prop collecting as a whole is related solely to HP props. I come from a time when the internet was new, eBay was new, and there was (relatively) more opportunity than risk in person to person online transactions. I had great fun buying and selling during this period, but now the marketplace seems to have been silenced. This brings me to the question which I have raised in the title of this post.
Let me say right off that, several years ago, I was advised directly by my main Harry Potter prop vendor that WB lawyers are actively watching vendor websites and eBay for sales of HP props and that, at least on eBay, a number of auctions for HP props have been terminated due to threats of legal action by WB Studios. I don't know if such action has been taken by WB in other online venues, but I would certainly like to hear if it has? (please note, none of my props were purchased through eBay auctions). I would also like to hear what the basis for such action by WB is all about?
I have tied-up some big $ in HP movie props and, unless I am the only poor boy on this forum who needs to maintain liquidity in their investments, I need to stay networked with other HP prop buyers/sellers in the event that either I am, or my survivors are, forced to sell my collection at some point in the future. Many may still think that eBay is the solution but, in my mind, the private collector/seller is no longer relevant on eBay. This internet venue which used to bring such excitement and opportunity to private sellers is now just a gutter for amazon.com leftovers. I quit selling there years ago.
I love my HP movie prop collection, but I am hesitant to broadcast what I have on this forum until I learn more about the marketplace. I hope that I get some responses that will give me more confidence to share the details of my collection, and I hope to gain a greater level of comfort so that I may either buy more of these items that make me happy, or surrender the whole lot. I hope to gain some in-sight here on this forum in this regard. If not, I'll just move on.
Thanks for listening.
Jimmy

It's a valid question. If you can look up Jason Deboard (spelling?) I think he would be the person I would get advice from on this. I don't know of many people as in "the know" about these kinds of issues.

I would be very careful. I have read at least a few accounts of WB getting back these props.

But this is only things I have read. I have no actual experience. I would track down Jason Deboard. Or even the guys at Screenused.com or propstore.com. I think those three would all be trusted advisors for you. And they are all great people.

Good luck. thumbsup

There was a cross bow that Hagrid used and was questioned on being ok to be sell here: http://www.julienslive.com/view-auctions/catalog/id/36/lot/11093/

"This item was removed from last years auction because of an investigation into the legitimacy of the item but the studio. It has been determined by the studio has confirmed by the archives and legal department this is indeed the crossbow used in the film and can be sold as described."

So in that instance WB, if thats who the "studio" is, was ok with it.


Be sure to post back what Jason says or if you find anything.

This is an intriguing subject. Other than props having been 'stolen' from WB archives and then sold off 'illegally', what grounds could WB possibly have to attempt to take it back from presumably innocent collectors?
The interesting point of this discussion, with prop collecting only becoming more of a mainstream interest in relatively more recent times, how far do these rules stretch to all the props from films maybe up to decades ago where they were often simply "taken by a crew member after filming wrapped" to be sold off later to a collector, sometimes even many years later?
I'm interested to know exactly what WB's angle is. Are they claiming some of these props are effectively stolen goods? If not, what is their argument? Could it perhaps be that they have only really just started to take notice of this growing market and after realising what they've missed out on, hope to reclaim these props and resell at an assumed heavily inflated price?
Sounds a little unfair to all the innocent collectors who have invested a great deal of time and money into some of these purchases...

Jimmy.

I'm sure there are various reasons why your initial posting was not the success you had wished.

Warner Brothers (and many other studios), are very protective of the original props, costumes, and art from their films. Especially the Harry Potter franchise. While WB has donated items with WB COA's for charity auctions in the past, very few HP items have made it out of the studio with their blessing.

There are also many fake items from the HP films circulating in the marketplace too.

Some of the authentic items that have been sold originate both from people who have worked on the films and those who have not. Items may have been acquired both legally and illegally.

As long as whatever you own was obtained legally, with WB's consent, you should have no problem. Otherwise, it's a different story.

Ahh the good ol' days of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix where the wands were taken by the dozens.

Let us not fool ourselves. Items stolen off a set by crew members are in fact stolen property. And the rightful owner (usually the studio) can attempt to reclaim those items.

This, is a fact always ignored by collectors. It is up to you to know what the studio will and will not do to regain their items if they were obtained this way.

When a big Star Trek collection came on the market two years ago, all of which went out the back door, I spoke to the people at both CBS and Paramount to make sure they were not going to pursue collectors. And while Profiles was pissed off I called the items stolen property, that was a fact. And what I did was make sure collectors could buy the items safely, without CBS or Paramount worrying about trying to retrieve those items.

Now, many times prop masters or third parties have all rights to the item, and then you are in the clear. You just have to know whose items it is you are buying.

Alec

What's worse are the guys like the MGM witches shoes, security guard at Warner's in the 90's and various paramount gatekeepers who have abused their position and sold stuff out the backdoor.

Jimmy,

The problem with Potter items is that Warner have only ever officially released a very limited amount of them from the production - mainly paper based. So, technically speaking, anything else isn't released and Warner may stop the sale of / try to take possession of 'non official' items if they hear about it. This has happened in the past but not in all cases. For the earlier films some items were rented to the production or given away for marketing purposes (I own a few such things) and they can be legally owned and sold.

Hope this helps a little.

Regards,

David

tardis55 said:

What's worse are the guys like the MGM witches shoes, security guard at Warner's in the 90's and various paramount gatekeepers who have abused their position and sold stuff out the backdoor.

Click to expand...

Quite correct Mark. In fact most the the substantial Star Trek collection in Profiles in 2010 was sold to one collector by a guy at a Paramount warehouse.

Alec

Hell everybody was selling stuff in the 90's

Thats why there are so many cool pieces out there! :lol

tardis55 said:

various paramount gatekeepers who have abused their position and sold stuff out the backdoor.

Click to expand...

Is there any such thing as a "statute of limitations" applicable to owning such things? For instance, if I were the owner of the Tin Man's axe from the Wizard of Oz and that prop had been unaccounted for over the past 70+ years. Could MGM seize my item when I finally decide to auction it off (through Sotheby's obviously) :confused
My Harry Potter props are all hardware and my seller has given me his personal COA on the big ticket items. I'm confident that the items were not stolen and my seller is well regarded in both the US and UK, but at the same time, I have pressed my seller to give me more in the way of provenance which I have promised not to divulge to anyone other than the next owner (we all have an expiration date). He won't budge. Authenticity is unquestionable, but the chain of custody is undocumented.
Thanks for all the great replies.
Jimmy

I think it starts with the studio involved. MGM, such as with your OZ example, had a series of sales 40 years ago that lasted a month and pretty much cleared the back lot and warehouses. They no longer even own the historic property.

On the other hand, there is Warner Brothers, who exist on the very same ground they have since 1926, have never had a large public offering/auction of their assets, have their own museum and a reputation for protecting their brand. HARRY POTTER is also a recent production, worth billions and is an International phenom. Statute of limitations here, to me, is based on copyright renewal, which can now last for decades, so I think the artifacts from recent films, not officially sold, can be claimed. Incidences are still rare.

The only examples of studios claiming classic pieces I am aware of first hand were Paramount in the 90s for current STAR TREK shows (they even raided conventions for official color stills) and WB came after the Maltese Falcon that was on the cover of PIH's first catalog.

And, of course, the most strident litigator of all is AMPAS for the golden guys.

rick

Fun Little Fact about stealing props from the set.

Jason Isaacs who played Lucius Malfoy tried to steal his own wand/cane.
When I first heard this it really made me laugh. I thought to myself. Hey who can blame him. I would of done the same xD

KevinBGoode said:

Fun Little Fact about stealing props from the set.

Jason Isaacs who played Lucius Malfoy tried to steal his own wand/cane.
When I first heard this it really made me laugh. I thought to myself. Hey who can blame him. I would of done the same xD

Click to expand...

Not sure about the wand but I do know he was gifted his Death Eater mask.

I think it was the Deathly Hallows behind-the-scene feature where they had all these extras both students and death eaters coming in to do battle scenes. Everyone gets a wand in the morning but noone gets to go home until all the wands are accounted for.

It was quite a contrast from Chris Hemsworth casually talking about forgetting to bring a hammer home after Thor and saying he'll make sure the same mistake will not be repeated after Avengers is done.

Although I guess the leads do get some leeway since they'll likely take the stuff as a genuine momento and not to throw up on ebay.

Yankee Jim said:

Is there any such thing as a "statute of limitations" applicable to owning such things? For instance, if I were the owner of the Tin Man's axe from the Wizard of Oz and that prop had been unaccounted for over the past 70+ years. Could MGM seize my item when I finally decide to auction it off (through Sotheby's obviously) :confused

Click to expand...

I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not 100% sure on this, but I believe statutes of limitations only apply to criminal suits being brought, not civil suits. So, I do not there there is any time frame beyond which you'd be clear from a legal standpoint.

Cj

Yankee Jim said:

Is there any such thing as a "statute of limitations" applicable to owning such things? For instance, if I were the owner of the Tin Man's axe from the Wizard of Oz and that prop had been unaccounted for over the past 70+ years. Could MGM seize my item when I finally decide to auction it off (through Sotheby's obviously) :confused

Click to expand...

Generally speaking, though it varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, there is a statute of limitations for criminal offenses. The problem comes in that while the statute of limitations may have long since passed for the "larceny" of the axe, the fact that you are currently "possessing" it means that the crime of "possessing stolen property" is actually still occurring. Once an item is stolen, it is always stolen property...regardless of how you came to possess it, and as such there really can be no statute of limitations on the crime of possession of stolen property because the crime is ongoing.

If you're looking for Harry Potter props, there are some significant pieces coming up in the March 9th ScreenUsed.com auction, including a Nimbus 2000 broom shaft. I don't know how they were acquired, but you can always shoot off an email to Jeff or Desi.

And if you wanted more evidence of why these props are never sold publicly:
Per ScreenUsed's website:

March 7, 2013 - We apologize, but the following lots have been removed from the sale.
...
Lot 141 - Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - Harry Potter's Wand
Lot 142 - Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - Hermione Granger's Wand
Lot 143 - Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - Ron Weasley's Wand
Lot 144 - Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone - Harry's Nimbus 2000 Broom Shaft
Lot 145 - Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - Harry's Prophecy Record
Lot 146 - Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone - Set of 4 School Ties
Lot 147 - Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix - Set of 4 School Ties
Lot 148 - Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone - Hogwarts Invitation Envelope

No details provided as to why they were pulled... But I think we can all figure it out.