I found a story (I guess it was from the Hollywood Reporter) that gets at the legal issues I have been referring to, and that I think are implicit in Coco's statement. Watching tonight's episode, I note again that Conan did not actually say that he was quitting the show:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100113/tv_nm/us_obrien_legal LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) – Does Conan O'Brien's contract give NBCthe right to bump him to 12:05 to make room for Jay Leno at 11:35? That's the $40 million legal question hovering over O'Brien's open defiance Tuesday of NBC's plan to move his "Tonight Show" 30 minutes later. Despite all the hoopla, it's really a simple query. If O'Brien's deal says his "Tonight Show" will be broadcast at 11:35 p.m. (or the equivalent post-local news slot in the markets that air him earlier), then NBC would be in violation of his contract by attempting to bump him. If there isn't any time-slot language in his deal, O'Brien's refusal to take the 12:05 slot would put him in breach if he doesn't do his show, presumably allowing NBC to void his deal without paying him off. NBC already has staked its position in the New York Times: "The contract, NBC is arguing, guaranteed Mr. O'Brien would be installed as host of 'The Tonight Show' -- and unlike many other deals for late-night stars, Mr. O'Brien's contract contains no specific language about the time period the show would occupy, NBC executives said." David Letterman, for instance, has a time-slot language in his deal, so some are already blaming O'Brien's lawyers for not thinking ahead and specifying his slot. But it's likely not that cut-and-dried a legal issue. If the breach-of-contract claim ever got to court, perhaps O'Brien could argue that specifying a time slot was not necessary because "The Tonight Show" has aired in essentially the same time period for decades. O'Brien already suggested in his missive Tuesday that moving "Tonight" essentially makes it a different program; in other words, he's saying the essence of "The Tonight Show" is that it follows the local news. NBC would ask where in his deal language it says that, but the history of the show is on O'Brien's side on that issue. Also, the name implies a show at night, not during the early morning. NBC could counter that its "Late Night" airs in the morning hours, but a "Tonight Show" that doesn't air, you know, tonight, would be a good fact for O'Brien. (Letterman appeared to agree with his rival, joking Tuesday that it should be renamed "The Tomorrow Show.") O'Brien also could argue that by replacing his show with something starring the former host of "The Tonight Show," NBC effectively breached his agreement because viewers would believe that Leno is hosting the "real" "Tonight Show," regardless of its name. NBC could be in violation of the state's requirement that parties negotiate deals in good faith. Again, NBC would likely point to O'Brien's deal and ask where it specifies that it can't hire Leno to do another show. On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 11:01 PM, PGage <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 9:19 PM, donz5 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I took the Conan statement that you quoted a bit differently. "... >> resolve this quickly so that my staff, crew, and I can do a show we >> can be proud of, for a company that values our work" sounded to me >> that he was reaching out to any outlet other than NBC. >> > > Yes, that probably is the most straightforward way to take this. But it > just strikes me that is stops short of slamming the door on staying with The > Tonight Show, and it is possible to construe this in such a way that Conan > has not resigned from his job (which he defines as hosting The Tonight Show > at 11:35) - he has simply refused to accept the altered terms of employment > that NBC is attempting to force on him. This statement suggests that, should > NBC change its mind in the near future and maintain the staus quo, Conan > will continue to show up for work. It also suggests that, should NBC either > follow through on its intention to move the Tonight Show to 12:05, or > install someone else as the Host of the Tonight Show, it would be NBC, not > Conan, who has violated the terms of the contract. > > Unless Conan specifically puts in writing "I quit", I think NBC will be > very careful about putting in any other host of a program called The Tonight > Show. At the least I would think they would want to run at least a week's > worth of programs called The Tonight Show at 12:05 and have Conan refuse to > show up for work (probably airing reruns in the event) to establish that it > is Conan who has broken the contract, not them. Then it would come down to > the actual language of the contract, and does it really allow NBC to move > The Tonight Show permanently to 12:05 (as opposed to occasionally due to > conflicts with live events or breaking news). Of course, the lawyers may > arrange some kind of settlement before it comes down to that. >
-- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
