"The owner of the Golden Globes has filed a juicy lawsuit against the production company behind the show, claiming it breached a contract and signed a secret deal to continue producing the NBC telecast for six years without the owner’s consent," THR, Esq. reports.
According to the article, " ‘This is a brazen attempt by [Dick Clark Productions] not only to extend its television production and licensing rights beyond the terms of the parties’ agreement, but to do so in perpetuity,’ the lawsuit claims."
The owner of the Golden Globes is the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, which has presented the awards since January, 1944.
According to The New York Times’ Media Decoder account of the lawsuit, "The foreign press association is a nonprofit organization maintained by about 80 international entertainment journalists. Since 1983, it has joined Dick Clark Productions in producing a televised show for which NBC pays a license fee that has risen over the years to about $13 million annually."
The Decoder article continues, "After the show’s costs are deducted, the association and Dick Clark Productions have split profits on an equal basis. But according to the lawsuit, the association earlier this year notified Dick Clark Productions — controlled since 2007 by Red Zone Capital Partners — that the 2011 show would be the last under an existing arrangement between the association and the company."
Then, according to the suit, as reported by the Decoder, last month Dick Clark Productions "surreptiously signed" the new deal with NBC to continue the broadcast for the next six years.
The Decoder also reports that one source said that members of the foreign press association "believe that rights to the show are worth far more than the new fee negotiated by the Dick Clark company, which starts at $17 million and escalates to about $26 million."
NBC declined comment to both THR, Esq. and the Decoder.
Dick Clark Productions said in a statement, according to THR, Esq.: "“The Hollywood Foreign Press Association, knowing it has no case in a court of law, is attempting to try this case in the court of public opinion. We are confident the case has no merit in either venue. Our respective rights under the contract are clear. The HFPA cannot unilaterally change the basis on which DCP and the HFPA have done business for almost three decades.”