The judge presiding over the case, U.S. District Court Judge Gary Allen Feess, is clearly an avid fan of Watchmen director Zack Snyder's work; his setting a trial date of January 6th - exactly two months ahead of the movie's scheduled release date - was accompanied by a specific direction to Fox that they should not seek an injunction against Warners to stop the release of the movie in the meantime. In fact, pre-trial discovery and depositions have been expedited in order for everything to be ready for the courtroom at the start of next year (Fox could, of course, ignore this direction, or simply seek an injunction following the discovery phase).

Between now and the trial, both Fox and Warners will be scrambling to come up with the best cases they can that each has the "real" rights to the movie - or, in Warners' case, considering the easiest way to try and settle this outside of the court room.

Court sets date for 'Watchmen' battle [Hollywood Reporter]

Unlike Batman Begins, which offered very few marketing tie-ins, The Dark Knight started life as a merchandising bonanza, according to the report:

Batman Begins" had played down its tie-ins, but for "Knight," Warner Bros. Consumer Products and DC Comics ramped up their efforts more than a year in advance of the picture's release, selling the master license to toymaker Mattel, with additional toys from Lego and Halsall and everything from Batman-branded underwear to a deal for Kmart to serve as the "Official Batman Headquarters." ...It was Nolan who came up with the idea of using the film's nearly six-minute opening sequence, a bank robbery, as a second teaser attached to the Imax release of "I Am Legend" in December.

"He wanted to make the movie into even more of an event," [Producer Chuck] Roven explains.

The death of Ledger threatened to derail all of the marketing plans... until his family stepped in, as Warners COO Alan Horn explained:

"We were already out with the 'Why so serious?' campaign," he notes. "We said (to Ledger's family), 'Look, is this an issue? Would you like us to pull this?' And here's what they said: 'Heath loved the movie, was very proud of it. This was just an accident.' They were fine with it — more than fine, they were completely supportive."

Sue Kroll, Warners' President of Worldwide Marketing, continues the story:

t became very clear when the family and others started to see some of Heath's bravado performance, and what a centerpiece it was to the movie, that there was no thought of marketing the film without him, as some suggested in the press around that time.

And news reports of Bale beating his family? Also easily avoided by the studio, according to Horn:

We just ignored it because it was his personal business... If he had asked us to involve ourselves, we would have been willing to discuss that, but he didn't mention it, and we didn't mention it.

That's right; Warners now operates on a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" basis when it comes to scandals. Or maybe that's just if your movie is about to become the second highest-grossing of all time.

Anatomy of a hit: The Dark Knight [Hollywood Reporter]

In a statement released to Entertainment Weekly about the matter, Fox said

Of course we are concerned about the fans; however, any disappointment from the core fans should not be directed toward Fox. What we are doing is seeking to enforce our distribution rights to Watchmen. Legal copyright ownership should not just be swept under the rug and ignored.

Warners, for their part, are saying very little in response:

We respectfully disagree with Fox's position and do not believe they have any rights in and to this project.

While Fox may have good reasons to try and delay or destroy the release of Watchmen (Not least of which would be to protect their own summer movies, including X-Men Origins: Wolverine, due out the week before Watchmen's projected date), they deny that they are trying to do any such thing; they're just trying to protect their interests and have been trying to do so since the movie started pre-production:

[A]ccording to a Fox source, studio lawyers contacted Warner Bros. about the distribution rights issue several times prior to the start of production but were rebuffed.

Uncivil Society's Jeff Trexler found more damning evidence in Fox's favor when examining the court documents:

Arguably the most explosive sentence in the order: "It is particularly noteworthy that nothing on the face of the complaint or the documents supplied to the Court establishes that Gordon, the claimed source of Warner Brothers' interest in 'Watchmen,' ever acquired any rights in 'Watchmen.'"

Deadline Hollywood has a timeline of events, as laid out in the court documents; again, it's not looking too good for Warners:

1994: Fox negotiated a “Settlement and Release” agreement with Gordon which contemplated that the Watchmen project would be put in “perpetual turnaround” to Lawrence Gordon Productions, Inc. The “turnaround notice” gave Lawrence Gordon Productions “the perpetual right . . . to acquire all of the right, title and interest of Fox [Watchmen] pursuant to the terms and conditions herein provided.” The turnaround notice then described the formula for determining the buy-out price in the event that Gordon elected to acquire Fox’s interest. Thus, the document suggests that Gordon acquired an option to acquire Fox’s interest in Watchmen for a price... May 2006: Warner Brothers, allegedly with knowledge of the 1991 Quitclaim, entered into a quitclaim agreement with Gordon under which it claims to have acquired the rights to the Watchmen project. Fox alleges that these facts demonstrate that, at the very least, it retained distribution rights in Watchmen, that it performed all of its obligations under the relevant agreements, and that while it granted Gordon what amounted to an option to acquire its rights, neither Gordon nor his successors ever fulfilled their contractual obligations to Fox. Indeed, Fox contends that Warner Bros either knew or turned a blind eye to the fact that Fox had retained distribution rights in the project, and that Gordon had not perfected his interest in the Watchmen project before quitclaiming it to Warner Brothers.

It now falls to Warners and/or Lawrence Gordon to prove that the Fox option was exercised, or perhaps pay the kind of settlement to Fox that Charlie has previously hinted at; one thing is for sure: Warners need Watchmen's buzz and potential box office next year, and they're probably willing to pay any price to keep it.

The Watchmen War [Entertainment Weekly]
Watchmen lawsuit original documents [Uncivil Society]
SAVE US! Warner's 'Watchmen' In Legal Peril After Judge Won't Dismiss Fox Suit [Deadline Hollywood]

According to Butler, "It's this descent into madness but explained in such a sane way that you totally feel it yourself." Which doesn't make much sense now, but we'll go along with it. If all future comic book related DVDs received this much attention to detail, it might create a new market and medium for comic books. Just imagine X-Men: Days of Future Past, The DVD. Unfortunatelty, it also means you'll have to double dip at the theater and later on DVD if you want the full experience. [Empire Online]