Roy Rogers and Gene Autry were two hugely successful stars in the mid-twentieth century who moved between the mediums of radio, television, and film. Their attempts to build multimedia empires, and, in particular, their lawsuits against Republic Studios in order to prevent their older feature films from appearing on television, were seminal in the history of the relationship between film and television. A closer look at their lawsuits helps illuminate that important period in media history and even overturns some long-held beliefs about that time. It shows how all periods of disruption are influenced by many persons with a wide range of diverse interests, and how amidst that tangled web of agendas, two actors from B-westerns could hold the film and television industries in suspense for years.
“Appellant’s Opening Brief,” Gene Autry vs. Republic Productions, Inc., Hollywood Television Service, et al.; United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 13522; Gene Autry Collection, Autry National Center of the American West, Los Angeles, CA.
2.
Autry v. Republic Productions, Inc. et al. No. 13522. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. 213 F.2d 667; 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 3561; 101 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 478, June 4, 1954.
3.
BalioTino. 1990. “Introduction to Part I.” In Hollywood in the Age of Television, edited by BalioTino, 3–40. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
4.
BazinAndréGreyHugh. 1960. “The Ontology of the Photographic Image.” Film Quarterly13 (4): 4–9.
5.
CarmanEmilyDrakePhilip. 2015. “Doing the Deal: Talent Contracts in Hollywood.” In Hollywood and the Law, edited by McDonaldPaulCarmanEmily, et al, 209–34. London: BFI Palgrave.
6.
“Complaint for Unfair Competition, For Declaratory Relief, and for Injunction,” October30, 1951; Gene Autry vs. Republic Productions, Inc., Hollywood Television Service, Inc., et al. Folder “13595 13596.” Box 260. Records of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of California. Central Division, 1938–1961. Civil Case Files 13590–13596. National Archives, Pacific Region, Perris, CA.
7.
Daily Variety. 1948a. “Autry Gets OK On Ariz. Station Buy.” April9, 3.
8.
Daily Variety. 1948b. “CBS Plans Video Pic Deal with Gene Autry.” May21, 14.
9.
Daily Variety1948c. “Old Pix Keep L.A. TV in Biz.” May21, 11.
10.
Daily Variety. 1948d. “66 ‘Hopalongs’ For Television Serials.” May21, 1.
11.
Daily Variety. 1950a. “‘Hopalongs’ Getting $ Million a Year from Television.” January26. 1, 10.
12.
Daily Variety. 1950b. “TV Trove in Them Thar Oaters: Pre-1946 Saddle-Sagas Gilt-Edge Studio Shelves.” April27, 1.
13.
DecherneyPeter. 2012. Hollywood’s Copyright Wars: From Edison to the Internet. New York: Columbia University Press.
14.
GainesJane. 1991. Contested Culture: The Image, the Voice, and the Law. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
HilmesMichele. 1990. Hollywood and Broadcasting: From Radio to Cable. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
17.
HurstRichard M.2007. Republic Studios: Between Poverty Row and the Majors. Lanham: The Scarecrow Press.
18.
KackmanMichael. 2008. “Nothing on but Hoppy Badges: Hopalong Cassidy, William Boyd Enterprises, and Emergent Media Globalization.” Cinema Journal47 (4): 76–101.
Opinion of Judge Bone, June4, 1954; Republic Pictures Corp. et al. v. Rogers. No. 13314. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. 213 F.2d 662; 1954 U.S. App. Lexis 4737; 101 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 475.
21.
PorstJennifer. 2013. “United States v. Twentieth Century-Fox, et al. and Hollywood’s Feature Films on Early Television. Film History25 (4): 114–42.
22.
PorstJennifer. 2020. Broadcasting Hollywood: Disruption, Convergence, and Feature Films on Early Television. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
23.
PryorThomas M.1951a. “Roy Rogers Ruling Bars Film Sale to TV.” New York Times, October19, 24.
24.
PryorThomas M.1951b. “Roy Rogers Suing on Video Problem.” New York Times, October19, 21.
25.
PryorThomas M.1951c. “Roy Rogers Tests TV Deal for Films.” New York Times, September15, 7.
26.
PryorThomas M.1952. “TV-Movie Tie-Ins Remain Confused: Conflicting Decisions by Two Jurists on Coast Make New Problem on Issue.” New York Times, May15, 39.
27.
PryorThomas M.1954. “Hollywood Edict: Ruling on Use of Autry, Rogers Films May Set Pattern—Of Best Sellers.” New York Times, June13, X5.
28.
Republic Pictures Corporation et al., Appellants, v. Roy Rogers, Appellee. 222 F.2d 950. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. San Francisco, May19, 1955.
29.
SantoA.2015. Selling the Silver Bullet: The Lone Ranger and Transmedia Brand Licensing. Austin: University of Texas Press.
30.
Television Magazine. 1950. “Focus.” September, 5.
31.
The New York Times. 1951. “Two Groups Plan Films in This City.” June26.
32.
Archival documents found in: Civil Case No. 13220-PH, Roy Rogers v. Republic Productions, Inc., Hollywood Television Service, Inc., et al.; Southern District of California, Central Division (Los Angeles); Records of the United States District Court, Record Group 21; National Archives at Riverside, Perris, CA.
33.
Affidavit of Morton Scott, July2, 1951.
34.
Argument of Herman F. Selvin, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings.
35.
ArthurF.Marquette’s Deposition, August21, 1951.
36.
Arthur Marquette’s Deposition, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, September28, 1951.
37.
Arthur Rush’s Deposition, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, September26, 1951.
38.
Arthur William Rush’s Testimony, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, October4, 1951.
39.
Earl R. Collins, Pres. Hollywood Television Service, Inc. letter to J.J. Van Nostrand, Jr., Vice Pres. Tel. Dir. Sullivan, Stauffer, Colwell & Bales, Inc., June8, 1951.
40.
FredericH.Sturdy Argument, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, October16, 1951.
41.
Frederic H. Sturdy’s Opening Statement, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings September13, 1951.
42.
FredericH.Sturdy’s Testimony, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, 10October1951.
43.
GershonHarry L., Attorney from Loeb and Loeb, “Notice of Appeal,” February25, 1952.
44.
Herbert J. Yates’s Deposition, September7, 1951.
45.
Herbert J. Yates’s Testimony, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, September26, 1951.
46.
Judge Peirson M. Hall’s Memorandum Opinion, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, October18, 1951.
47.
Morton Scott’s Testimony, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings September27, 1951.
48.
Motion for Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order, June23, 1951.
49.
Opening statements of Herman F. Selvin, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, September13, 1951.
50.
Preliminary Injunction, July24, 1951.
51.
Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings.
52.
Robert V. Newman’s Testimony, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings.
53.
Roy Rogers’s Testimony, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, September21, 1951.
54.
Saul N. Rittenberg’s Testimony, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, October5, 1951.
55.
Statements of Harry L. Gershon, Esq., Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings.
56.
Supreme Court Decision.
57.
Walter Frank Craig’s Testimony, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, October11, 1951.
58.
W. Arthur Rush Affidavit, July5, 1951.
59.
Wayne Tiss’s Affidavit, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, September28, 1951.
60.
Wayne Tiss’s Testimony, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings September20, 1951.
61.
William Arthur Rush, letter to Herbert Yates, Republic, January 20, 1950; Quoted in Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, Page 1069, September 26, 1951.
62.
William Arthur Rush’s Testimony, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, September26, 1951.
63.
William R. Golden’s Testimony, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, October2, 1951.
64.
Archival documents found in: Civil Case No. 13596-BH; Gene Autry v. Republic Productions, Inc., et al.; Southern District of California, Central Division (Los Angeles); Records of the United States District Court, Record Group 21; National Archives at Riverside, Perris, CA.:
65.
“Answer,” November5, 1951.
66.
Gene Autry’s Testimony.
67.
Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings.
68.
Archival documents found in: Folder P-1, Drawer 25, MSS 2389; Jack Mathis Collection (Legal Battles—Suits . . .), Tom Perry Special Collections, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT.
69.
GershonHarry L., Memo of Conversation with Don Fedderson, August23, 1951.
70.
Judgment for Defendants, January14, 1952; Roy Rogers vs. Republic Productions, Inc. et al.
71.
Opinion, Gene Autry v. Republic Production, Inc. et al.
72.
Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, Roy Rogers v. Republic Production, Inc. and Hollywood Television Service.
73.
Archival documents found in: Civil Case 14354-Y, U.S. v. Twentieth Century-Fox, et al.; Southern District of California, Central Division (Los Angeles); Records of the United States District Court, Record Group 21; National Archives at Riverside, Perris, CA.
74.
Further Answers of Defendants Republic Pictures Corporation to the Interrogatories Dated March4, 1953, Propounded by the Plaintiff Herein, December28, 1953.
75.
Testimony of Milford Fenster, Reporter’s Transcript of Proceedings, Volume 9, October6, 1955.
