Are there any rumors of spinoffs yet?

Any rumors of spinoffs? Afan

There were all sorts of rumors flying several months ago. But I think, after all the cast members were interviewed saying they wanted to get far away from their characters ( as if they were a disease), the rumors have pretty much died. I also read that Jerry has to give his approval to a sequel--and understandably, he doesn't want to see one of his spawn in the hands of another creator. And then there is the little problem that a spinoff might adversely affect the hugely popular syndication series. alt showbiz gossip

actually, this is not quite accurate...michael richards was said to be pushing quite hard for a "kramer" spin-off, according to a wide variety of magazines and t.v. shows...however, it has yet to materialize, which is great news to me...seinfeld shouldn't be reduced to a spin-off series, just remembered as it was...

===milk d

It is accurate if you believe what he said in Rolling Stone--something to the effect of getting as far away from the Kramer character as possible. I think the Vanity Fair article on Jerry--a very maligned puff-piece interview, by the way, was widely quoted by other magazines and newspapers. It was that magazine that said Michael Richards said he was wondering why NBC didn't even ask him to do a spinoff. That easily could have been delivered tongue-in-cheek. Between the 2 publications, I'm inclined to believe Rolling Stone. alt showbiz gossip

NOt all of the characters wanted to get far away from their characters. NBC offered to give Kramer a spinoff series but he wanted too much money for an episode. This was reported on the NBC news.

On Mon, 6 Jul 1998, Festus wrote:

of them are spinoffs of Seinfeld, and unless some amazing last minute change comes up none will be.

"Early to rise, early to bed makes a man healthy but socially dead." ---Yakko Warner

  Since Michael Richards, from what I understand, really created the Kramer
character himself-  or at least had the largest hand in the origination of the
character's elements (mannerisms, habits, personality quirks etc. etc.),   I
think Mr. Seinfeld and Mr. David would have a hard time stopping Richards if he
wanted to do a show centered on the Kramer character.  If it went to court,
Richards would surely win the rights to Kramer I would guess.
   Jerry and Larry David simply came up with the idea of a loveable freeloader
who lived across from Jerry  (based on their real life acquaintance Kenny
Kramer).  Michael Richards is the one who really gave the character all of his
memorable qualities.   Perhaps Jerry would win the rights to the name "Kramer",
 but I doubt it.  But if so, Richards could just plan a show about a man who is
a long lost identical twin brother -but doesn't know it, and the Kramer
connection could just be wryly hinted out, without ever directly mentioning
Seinfeld or Kramer.   But as I said, I am sure the law would allow him to use
"Kramer" along with the fictional persona he created and let him do anything he
wanted to with it.  How could Jerry stop him?   And with Richards looking at a
much smaller piece of the syndication pie than Jerry,  it wouldn't surprise me
to see him have a change of heart (regarding his respect for Jerry's intention
to keep the show pure and retired as a champion) and come back with a spin off.
  Odds are it would be mediocre though.
    Then again I'm no entertainment lawyer,  maybe Richards has no more right
to Kramer, than a man who builds a house and then sells it to someone.  Doesn't
sound quite right though.  Betcha the courts would let Michael perform Kramer
anywhere or time he wanted to:  on street corners,  on BBC or anywhere else he
wanted to.

  I'm not an entertainment lawyer and I don't know what sort of precedents
exist in this area-  there may be none yet.
  Kramer was a collaborative effort: the very basic rough outline we know was
hammered out by Jerry and Larry David,.  Many writers contributed to Kramer's
development, which seemed to find new directions with almost each episode.
Michael Richards himself seems to have done the bulk of the work though- and to
an unusual extent- which of course accounts for the most part for the
excellence of the Kramer character and its huge popularity.  Kramer is his
piece of intellectual property.  Just because Jerry and Larry knew a guy who
was mildly eccentric and Larry used to raid his refrigerator- well that is
pretty thin.
  It was all Michael:  the specific elements of the character Kramer -the
elements which are so distinctive and are about 50% of the show's draw I think
they would find if they could quantify it
-all the incredible physical comedy  - were all due to Richard's imagination.
  I strongly suspect that if Richards decided to challenge Jerry and /or Larry,
 he would have an extremely strong case.   I don't know of any precedents for
something like this.  For instance,  I don't know the details of Fraiser's spin
off from Cheers.  I don't know how much work Kelsey Grammer put into the
development of Frasier Crane-  lots of guys just play their roles and I sense
it ain't even close to what Richards put into Kramer.    I also don't know who
owns what's left of Cheers- or what deals had to be cut
to clear the way for the spin off Fraiser.    I'm sure whoever asked to be
payed, got payed-  producers and production companies buy all the rights they
can to avoid future legal fights- just because it is so much easier and less
expensive to leave no doubt as to who owns what definitively.
  If Richards could prove in court that he did the bulk of the work -that he
was the primary person who invented the Kramer character,  he might get the
right to do whatever he wants to do with it I should think.    Currently it
seems to be professional respect and courtesy along with genuine friendship
that reigns among and between Jerry and his main players.  That could change.
  The movie career might not fly.  Richards may wake up some future morning and
realize how huge a component of the show's success his work was, and how
relatively modestly he was compensated.  He may politely ask Jerry,  and if
denied -tell Seinfeld to go to hell and put Kramer back up on the small screen.
  I don't care who thinks they own what-  or what might be written down on
paper somewhere:  anything can be challenged.
   Cosmo Kramer was invented and is owned by Michael Richards- and that I think
anyone can see if they really look at the situation carefully and with a clear
eye.

that Kramer is, it is not his to use as he wishes.

Kramer

origination of the

etc.),   I

Richards if he

court,

The name & character of Kramer is is owned by Jerry Seinfeld/Larry David & probably NBC. Mr. Richards could NOT go & do a show about Kramer. Yes, he had a large part to do with creating the mannerisms, attitude, & everything that Kramer is, it is not his to use as he wishes.

Now if Jerry/Larry wanted to license the character to someone for a show, that would be entirely possible.

freeloader

all of his

Actually he has no rights whatsoever to the character Cosmo Kramer. The rights to that character are according to the agreement between the creators, studio, and network . . . in other words, Seinfeld, David, Castle Rock, and NBC. The individual actor has no rights to the character at all. Remember when Letterman went to CBS, and even though he brought the actor with him, the character name of "Larry Bud Mellman" the property of NBC.

Obviously, if Richards puts together a new series, he can take the characteristics, mannerisms, and personality of Kramer with him, but the name will be changed. In order to use the name, he will have to cut in all of the above to a heavy percentage of the new show's revenues, and that is unlikely.

  We don't know what would have happened if Dave had decided to challenge NBC.
Their bunch of hired guns simply did what corporate lawyers do, and threatened
Dave about the Larry Bud Mellman character name.   Dave I'm sure just laughed
and figured it wasn't worth a fight- or listened to his own legal counsel give
him the standard warn off.  But had he chosen to fight we don't know what might
have happened.  The law is a living and growing thing- not chiseled in stone.
New precedents might have been established in the intellectual property area
for all we know.
    The thing is that the Kramer/Michael Richards situation has some fairly
unique aspects (as far as the amount of work Richards alone put into its
creation-  and what kind of money is potentially involved).  We might be
surprised at what would happen if Richards really went after it with a well
organized, timed and planned legal attack.   Were he to create and helm a
Kramer spin off, it could be worth many hundreds of millions of dollars-  the
type of income Jerry is presently looking at.   There were no stakes even near
that level with the Larry Bud Mellman character.

Certainly the Seinfeld episodes that exist are owned firmly by whatever
combination of Jerry Seinfeld/Castle Rock/NBC  -and good luck ever challenging
that.  But Michael Richards' right to perform a character he was the prime and
principal creator of over an extensive 9 year period-  even if the fact is not
currently recognized anywhere on a legal document?  That could be an
interesting case.  (Even if he himself signed something in which he agreed to
never perform as Kramer without their say so,  it might not mean much under
good scrutiny).
   I know what Jerry's lawyers would say to this, and NBC's etc.,  but they
wouldn't necessarily be correct.  Nor would they necessarily win in court.
    Would anyone disagree that justice would say that Kramer belongs to
Richards more than anyone else in the world? To bar him from playing the
character by law seems ridiculous and totally absurd.
   What's NBC thinking- that they should keep the Kramer character on ice in
case they later decide they want to  hire Christopher Lloyd to play Kramer in a
future spin off?  As I said:  absurd.
   I don't care what contracts or documents have been drawn up or who signed
them  -and if there are laws supporting the ban of an actor performing an
original and distinctive character he created, then they are unjust laws.
    Richards has every right to make a living if he so chooses.  (In this case
a very, very, very, lucrative one).
  I mean, if someone sells you the rights to their life story- that should give
you the right to go out and make a movie and completely own and control that
piece of film.   But that shouldn't give you the right to exclusively control
the telling of that story- or ban its telling, or portrayal of that person in
any way for the next 99 years -or however long it takes for public domain to
kick in.  If there is a law written that supports such a thing, it is wrong.

studio, and network . . . in other words, Seinfeld, >>David, Castle Rock, and NBC. The

characteristics, mannerisms, and personality of Kramer >>with him, but the name

the above to a heavy percentage of the new show's >>revenues, and that is unlikely.

 I'm not an entertainment lawyer and I don't know what sort of precedents
exist in this area-  there may be none yet.
  Kramer was a collaborative effort: the very basic rough outline we know was
hammered out by Jerry and Larry David,.  Many writers contributed to Kramer's
development, which seemed to find new directions with almost each episode.
Michael Richards himself seems to have done the bulk of the work though- and to
an unusual extent- which of course accounts for the most part for the
excellence of the Kramer character and its huge popularity.  Kramer is his
piece of intellectual property.  Just because Jerry and Larry knew a guy who
was mildly eccentric and Larry used to raid his refrigerator- well that is
pretty thin.
  It was all Michael:  the specific elements of the character Kramer -the
elements which are so distinctive and are about 50% of the show's draw I think
they would find if they could quantify it
-all the incredible physical comedy  - were all due to Richard's imagination.
  I strongly suspect that if Richards decided to challenge Jerry and /or Larry,
 he would have an extremely strong case.   I don't know of any precedents for
something like this.  For instance,  I don't know the details of Fraiser's spin
off from Cheers.  I don't know how much work Kelsey Grammer put into the
development of Frasier Crane-  lots of guys just play their roles and I sense
it ain't even close to what Richards put into Kramer.    I also don't know who
owns what's left of Cheers- or what deals had to be cut
to clear the way for the spin off Fraiser.    I'm sure whoever asked to be
payed, got payed-  producers and production companies buy all the rights they
can to avoid future legal fights- just because it is so much easier and less
expensive to leave no doubt as to who owns what definitively.
  If Richards could prove in court that he did the bulk of the work -that he
was the primary person who invented the Kramer character,  he might get the
right to do whatever he wants to do with it I should think.    Currently it
seems to be professional respect and courtesy along with genuine friendship
that reigns among and between Jerry and his main players.  That could change.
  The movie career might not fly.  Richards may wake up some future morning and
realize how huge a component of the show's success his work was, and how
relatively modestly he was compensated.  He may politely ask Jerry,  and if
denied -tell Seinfeld to go to hell and put Kramer back up on the small screen.
  I don't care who thinks they own what-  or what might be written down on
paper somewhere:  anything can be challenged.
   Cosmo Kramer was invented and is owned by Michael Richards- and that I think
anyone can see if they really look at the situation carefully and with a clear
eye.