-130-
Ackerman group. He testified that he did not discuss this
provision with his client, and that in any event CDR would not
have asked to remove this provision because “we didn’t care too
much what was in here.”
e. Selection of EBD Film Rights
Mr. Peters testified that in 1996, during Epic Productions’
efforts to sell the CDR library, someone at either Credit
Lyonnais or EBD instructed him to find some low-value films and
development projects within the CDR library. The idea was to
find some titles and development projects that in Mr. Peters’
view had very little value, so that removal of those rights would
have no significant impact on the CDR library’s overall value.
For example, Mr. Peters testified that he selected films with
rights that were about to expire in the near future (e.g., in 1
or 2 years) and predominantly films that were low-budget,
exploitation genre films. In addition, the totality of rights to
the film assets was not removed from the CDR library; instead,
only some subgroup (e.g., domestic home video or domestic
cassette rights) was removed. Ultimately, Mr. Peters selected
the “U.S. Video Film Rights” to the 65 film titles and the rights
to the 26 development projects listed in Schedule 1.6(b) of the
exchange and contribution agreement.
On the basis of Mr. Peters’ testimony, it is reasonable to
conclude that the Credit Lyonnais group had no intentions of
Page: Previous 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011