Don’t they? It sounds reasonable to me. If the heirs or assigns don’t wish to be party to the contract, they can return the award to the Academy.
Has this ever been tested in a court? It’s one thing to put something in a contract it’s another to test it in the courts.
It’s like non-compete agreements for work. The courts will generally uphold them only if they don’t produce an undue burden on the person signing it.
It would be interesting to have an Oscar winner be a million dollars in debt and declare bankruptcy only to have someone offer him a million dollars for the Oscar statue. I wonder what the bankruptcy court would think of that? I wonder if they’d at least try to get the money.
As for future in contracts, when Pat Robinson sold his original “Family Channel” to Fox, he put in a clause "to its future line of secular owners was the demand that his talk show, The 700 Club, be aired network, along with another show I forget now.
As for wills, I know you can put stipulations in your wills provided they don’t run contrary to public policy. For instance, a man can’t say he’ll leave all his money to his wife, provided she doesn’t get married again. That runs contrary to public policy, so it wouldn’t be enforced
I’d be curious to see this one go to court.
Are there any contract lawyers here?
I reckon clauses that force you to sell something for $1 if you want to get rid of it would be an invalid clause.
Here’s a current one, and there have been several others.
More background on the Pickford Oscar suit here and here.
Orson Welles’ daughter successfully fended off a lawsuit brought by the Academy to sell one of her father’s Oscars- see here.
Yes, but according to your earlier post, the clause was added in 1950 and I think all of these Oscars were awarded prior to that. I don’t know what would happen if someone who signed the agreement tried to fight it, but I assume that the academy’s attorneys were careful when they wrote the clause.
If you inherit a car or a house that’s not fully paid off, you’re bound to either service the debt or give up on inheriting, no? Pretty much the same thing.
Lots of medals etc. come with clauses like that. If the Queen of Denmark got around to recognizing my incredible services for the country and awarded me the Grand Cross of the Order of the Dannebrog (which comes with some rather nice bling), my heirs would be obliged to hand back the goodies once I shuffled off my mortal coil.
On the contrary, that clause is routine in many contracts.
For instance, your credit card agreement travels with your estate and your “heirs, legatees, executors, administrators, estate, successors and assigns” are bound by it. Otherwise the estate could just repudiate the debt.
Super Bowl rings (and World Series rings) are given out by the teams, not the league. While the Oscars are relatively rare – one per winner – the championship rings are given to players, coaches, trainers, scouts, front office staff, and friends of the owner. There are way more rings from the New York Giants win last year than there are Best Picture Oscars since they started giving them out.
I believe Pickford’s original Oscar was lost or misplaced, and in order to get the replacement some years later, she had to sign the agreement. The Academy claims (I think) that the subsequent contract also covers her other Oscars. I think it goes to trial soon, so we’ll see.
Teams can give championship rings to whoever they want. When the Hurricanes won the Stanley Cup in 2006 Kid Rock got a ring since he is a good friend of the owner. Also the players wives got smaller rings. Team employees who did not get a ring could buy a smaller version of the ring.
What about donating Oscars to say, museums and the like? Since you aren’t selling them-they’re being given away.
So what’s the worst that can happen if you lose the lawsuit?
The Academy’s out a dollar. And you’re liable for making them whole, naturally.
(seriously though I’m curious too)
Shelly Winters did. Donated it to the Anne Frank House Museum.
The wording is fascinating. In essence you The Star are awarded an iconic representation of an Oscar tm. There is only one Oscar. It is the idea of the Oscar that you are awarded. Whether you take the certificate with pretty gold image of Oscar ( awarded freely, as is your nomination certificate- I’ve held both ) or you are awarded the statuette ( I’ve also held those ), you are not really winning The Oscar.
You are holding in your hands an iconic representation of a legally owned item. You cannot sell what you do not own. The people awarded an Oscar statuette are in actuality awarded the right to say that they have been recognized for their work. They do not own the right to do with as they wish with the statuette. ( Just as every single time the Oscar statuette is represented in a photograph, permission must be given by the AMPAS ).
On a geeky personal note, uh, they’re very damned cool. 
So are Emmys. Got nominated 4 times for an Emmy, never won. That stuff about the honor being in having been nominated? Utter bunk. You wanna WIN !!!
The Oscar I’ve seen up close and held a time or two is showing some flaking and wearing of the gold plating.
Cartooniverse