Talk:United Artists/Archives/2017
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Spshu in topic UAMG is still active
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
UAMG is still active
It looks as though after United Artists Media Group folded into MGM Television, after watching Steve Harvey's Funderdome, the series is copyrighted by "UAMG Content, LLC".
Look at what I found:
King Shadeed 18:17, August 6, 2017 (UTC)
- So. We have been through this before. DreamWorks Studios in its second incarnation was not legal called DreamWorks Studios, but DW II Studio (or something like that). UAMG Content, LLC exist, so what they are not using that brand. Disney Enterprises, Inc. exists. It is dormant. American International Pictures, Inc. still exist as of 2015. So what, it is still as the article previously stated "With this change, UA once again went dormant." Spshu (talk) 23:07, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Did you not look at those two site I have displayed on this talk page??? King Shadeed 20:22, August 7, 2017 (UTC)
- And perhaps you should take a look at this. So don't try to argue with me if you don't know what you're talking about. King Shadeed 20:29, August 7, 2017 (UTC)
- I have looked. Are you daft? I know what I am talking about. It is you has not made a single point. There is no conclusion to can draw except they exist. I have point out that there are these subsidiaries that we can prove exist, but cannot prove anything from their existence. Don't post or make changes to articles base on your speculation based on the existence of some lettered plus word LLC. You are arguing that UAMG Content, LLC exists and active as an IP holder gets you United Artist being active as a unit, which it doesn't. I know what I am talking about since I dropped example after example of various corporate entities that have vague existence that don't prove anything. All this proves is that MGM TV is using an United Artist Media Group subsidiary as a IP entity, which is passive. There were 15 United Artist, 2 UA and 1 MGM & UA subsidiaries in the MGM Holding group of companies at its last bankruptcy. None of those UA subsidiaries made it possible to say that UA is active. When you can figure out what you are talk about then come back and let me know. Spshu (talk) 15:34, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Put two and two together before you "ass"ume like you always do! What does "UAMG" stand for? "United Artists Media Group". Do your company history from Mark Burnett Productions all the way to UAMG Content under MGM Television! Because clearly you don't know what you're talking about! Do you ever?? I don't remember YOU finding the information about UAMG Content! You can't be civil with other people here since you think you know everything! Your assumptions won't get you everywhere! Every year is the SAME THING with you! Stay in your place and stop trying to prove you're a better contributor and editor than everyone else! If United Artists is dormant, then why are they using "United Artists Corporation" as the co-copyright holder of the James Bond films and WHY are they using the name "UAMG Content"?? UA can't be dormant if MGM is using the United Artists name and/or its abbreviations! Keywords: "in-name-only" for the former.
- I have looked. Are you daft? I know what I am talking about. It is you has not made a single point. There is no conclusion to can draw except they exist. I have point out that there are these subsidiaries that we can prove exist, but cannot prove anything from their existence. Don't post or make changes to articles base on your speculation based on the existence of some lettered plus word LLC. You are arguing that UAMG Content, LLC exists and active as an IP holder gets you United Artist being active as a unit, which it doesn't. I know what I am talking about since I dropped example after example of various corporate entities that have vague existence that don't prove anything. All this proves is that MGM TV is using an United Artist Media Group subsidiary as a IP entity, which is passive. There were 15 United Artist, 2 UA and 1 MGM & UA subsidiaries in the MGM Holding group of companies at its last bankruptcy. None of those UA subsidiaries made it possible to say that UA is active. When you can figure out what you are talk about then come back and let me know. Spshu (talk) 15:34, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- And perhaps you should take a look at this. So don't try to argue with me if you don't know what you're talking about. King Shadeed 20:29, August 7, 2017 (UTC)
- Did you not look at those two site I have displayed on this talk page??? King Shadeed 20:22, August 7, 2017 (UTC)
Now, start from the beginning with these sources and user your common sense. Put two and two together and stop being so cocky and arrogant!:
King Shadeed 13:28, August 8, 2017 (UTC)
- Look, I have been civil with you. We cannot make assumptions nor does what you found support what you say. Stop assuming what I do or do not know that is uncivil and has the tenancy to tick people off -- you know common sense. I have been aware of UAMG Content, LLC being the copyright holder for weeks. So, I read the articles and have in support of Burnett's company assuming the United Artist Media Group (UAMG) name. UAMG was merged operational in MGM Television Group. Where in the Variety article does it say UAMG Content LLC? It does not say any thing about it. The article says "...United Artists Media Group will be absorbed under the MGM Television Group umbrella." So, any UAMGroup entities for all intent and purpose are a part of MGM Television Group and are using that name - Trade name. That is why I brought up DW Studios, which still exists and is the DreamWorks Studios owned by Paramount and DW II companies which formerly operated as DreamWorks after Spielberg left Paramount's DW Studios. Dormant can mean they exist but have little activity Like sleeping or basic passive - they exist on paper and do some minor activity like hold IP. Spshu (talk) 18:41, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Nevermind the DreamWorks examples, I'll give you a BETTER example: Columbia/Embassy Television merging with Tri-Star Television. The Tri-Star and Embassy programs produced under the Columbia Pictures Television banner and the Embassy programs produced under the copyright "ELP Communications". King Shadeed 20:27, August 8, 2017 (UTC)