For those asking-

General Hospital purchased the rights to Skye when they began using the character in 2001.

Intriguing. Did they have to purchase them from OLTL--or from AMC? (I think she was on OLTL for more than 2 years...)

GH never purchased the rights to Skye because ABC ALWAYS owned their soaps (prior to PP getting the rights to original AMC+OLTL characters per agreement) and allowed crossovers when necessary. PP giving Skye back to GH last year was just a rumor that someone from DD started. PP is so focused on OLTL I'm not sure if they are even aware of Skye or are they? Either way that can also help them with their case.

Edited April 19, 201312 yr by Kendall

Nevertheless, the point is the characters were the property of Prospect Park. If they want to sue, it's well within their legal right -- regardless of the fact that every single critic without a law degree or a career in the motion picture industry thinks it's asinine. ABC and General Hospital's management are the ones at fault. Do I have my own feelings about the snobbishness of the actors who'd rather work on television than internet shows? Yes. But that's their right. They can turn down a paycheck if they want. However, ABC and General Hospital invested way too much in these characters out of some personal loyalty to the actors. I don't find it a coincidence that they had Todd, John and that thing hook up with core characters. Todd didn't find, say, Alexis attractive. John wasn't into Elizabeth. The chick with the chin wasn't into Trey -- the one she actually HAD CHEMISTRY with and was created by Carlivati... No! They were all into the leads of GH: Carly, Sam and Michael. They tried to hedge their bets by attaching their picks to central figures on the show, thinking that PP wouldn't dare remove them. Guess what? They did! Now they're eating it.

I just love how people are now feeling sorry for poor ABC because of villainous Prospect Park when, 18 months ago, people were boycotting ABC because they dared to cancel AMC and OLTL! My, how the hypocrites wax fickle!

Edited April 19, 201312 yr by R Sinclair

Well said.

For those asking-

General Hospital purchased the rights to Skye when they began using the character in 2001.

That horse is in your avatar... Traitor, goddammit! TRAITOR!

Well said.

Thank you...

All Her Children!

Thank you...

All Her Children!

That horse is in your avatar... Traitor, goddammit! TRAITOR!

Don't call off the wedding over this

I just love how people are now feeling sorry for poor ABC because of villainous Prospect Park when, 18 months ago, people were boycotting ABC because they dared to cancel AMC and OLTL! My, how the hypocrites wax fickle!

Thank YOU!

People keep forgetting that the pure and noble ABC CANCELLED OLTL. They set this ball rolling. GH would have been cancelled too. Their ratings were not climbing when the decision was made to extend GH. They just didn't reside in the same cellar that The Revolution did. The "good faith" argument holds water for me. ABC sold (not gifted) the rights to the show, it's characters, their histories. There is no question FrankenRon damaged the franchise. Diminished the product. It's not a question of whether the characters are "essential" to OLTL (because they certainly aren't essential to GH). It's that the stories Ron told for them on GH damaged OLTL and the potential stories they intended to tell. If that happened without PP's approval, and their approval was part of the agreement, then PP has every right to sue for damages.

People keep saying when Ron and Frank made the decisions they did for these characters EVERYONE thought PP was dead in the water. But forget that when PP allowed GH to use these characters EVERYONE including FrankenRon thought GH wasn't far behind. The original planned storylines for these three was nowhere close to what it ended up being or what PP agreed to when they loaned/leased the characters for a limited run.

Again. The three aren't "essential" to either show. Heck a man wearing prosthetic legs won Olympic gold. Essential means different things to different people.

For those asking-

General Hospital purchased the rights to Skye when they began using the character in 2001.

Where did you come up with this? The character of Skye belonged to ABC. ABC owned all their soaps at that point. GH wouldn't "need" to purchase her. ABC was free to put her wherever they wanted. Money did not need to be exchanged between soaps to allow the crossover

Where did you come up with this? The character of Skye belonged to ABC. ABC owned all their soaps at that point. GH wouldn't "need" to purchase her. ABC was free to put her wherever they wanted. Money did not need to be exchanged between soaps to allow the crossover

My understanding is that actor's contracts generally were with the show, not abc. But there were a few that had contracts with the network.

Even though I think she would be a perfect addition.

Here, here!

My understanding is that actor's contracts generally were with the show, not abc. But there were a few that had contracts with the network.

Even if that was the case, the shows were still owned by ABC..some stars had a direct contracts aka smaller deals with the show..some ala Tony Geary, Robin C, Erika Slezak, Rebecca Budig, Miss Lucci had/have bigger contracts with the network. At the end of the day Skye belongs to PP. Why you think Frank ushered her off with Blair and Tea and we never heard from her again. Maybe it was a slip with Frank and Ron..who knows. I BET Ron won't mention Skye from now on until this PP stuff is ressolved.

Edited April 20, 201312 yr by Kendall

Well said.

I must agree. Although I've said PP was better off dropping the lawsuit and moving on, R Sinclair makes a fast and hard case for why they shouldn't. Love ya, R!