-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Major guilds support Kirby vs. Marvel's rights to properties (Up: Settlment Reached)
- Thread starter SCULLIBUNDO
- Start date
- Status
Freedom = $1.05
Banned
you think this is bad you should read up on the state of affairs regarding Superman
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
It includes Fantastic Four as well. As I understand it (and I could be WAY, WAY off base), Kirby's heirs could potentially deny Marvel the use of any of the characters. So yeah, they could force Marvel, Sony or Fox to pay them a substantial amount every time they want to make a film using those same characters.
And as I understand it, Kirby's heirs are in the right, basically continuing Kirby's old case up until he died. So this isn't just some money-grab sprung after-the-fact of Marvel's success by some wanting kids. This is the same case Kirby had been fighting Marvel on all along where he basically got fucked by them.
And as I understand it, Kirby's heirs are in the right, basically continuing Kirby's old case up until he died. So this isn't just some money-grab sprung after-the-fact of Marvel's success by some wanting kids. This is the same case Kirby had been fighting Marvel on all along where he basically got fucked by them.
the_standard
Neo Member
So Marvel would need to pay team Kirby every time they used half of his characters?
block tower
Member
Kirby had so much of his work stolen. im in favor. Stan Lee is infamous for tip toeing around the creation of Spider-Man, Lee to this day uses legal talk or no comment when asked his involvement in creating Spider-Man. Kirby was robbed.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
This isn't true at all. This is Kirby's heirs continuing the very same rights case that Kirby himself had been fighting for up until his death. Kirby's heirs are in the right here.
Flying Toaster
Member
I thought this as well but looking into it, the Kirby family has been fighting the whole time trying to get all his creations under one universal control group.
Dude I know Kirby heirs been at it for years. I am talking about these hollywood Guilds. Now they down for the cause?
nintendork666
Member
Uhhh... Steve Ditko designed Spider-man. Not Jack Kirby.
Duane Cunningham
Member
Ummmm....
Soodanim
Gold Member
I suppose it depends on how the characters came about. If Kirby was paid to create characters for them, then this could fall dead. If he went to them with characters and said "Publish this for me", I would guess that things would be different.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Well, it tells you why in the article. If it goes to the Supreme Court, it could have major ramifications on the authorship rights for all content creators in the industry.
What are they entitled to? They didn't create the characters.
Yeah now that Disney has the keys to a goldmine they think they can okey doke around them and try to get the rights from the family for peanuts.
They doing dirty in the name of justice.
None of what you're saying here makes sense.
block tower
Member
not true. there's a lot of evidence that Kirby came up with the character of Spider-Man. and again Stan Lee will not legally say he created the character along with Ditko.
Ninja Scooter
Member
It's almost like Hollywood Guilds only got involved when the dispute started including films and television. CRAZY!!
Diprosalic
Banned
clearacell
Member
Yeah this is pretty much how it's going to be. Like it could be said the creation was done by commitee, by "marvel" because he was a paid employee with the ideas thrown around. If there is proof he made the characters beforehand then they are his, but if he created them for marvel then they have the case that they own them.
Just_myles
Member
Losing rights over Spiderman? Wasn't he a Lee/Ditko creation?
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
The way the comics industry treated its creators (and still do, somewhat) I hope the heirs win.
Aren't some of these going to expire before long anyway (Captain America, anyway)?
Aren't some of these going to expire before long anyway (Captain America, anyway)?
Where were they when X-men 1,The Hulk tv show, The 70s Captain America movies, the Nick Fury movie, Spiderman live action tv show, the Generation X movie, and Mutant X was on and popping?
lordfroakie
Member
Not if Disney has something to say about it.
I think the Kirby heirs deserve a piece of the pie. Maybe not complete ownership of the characters, who -- to be fair -- weren't created by them and have been considerably changed over the years. But a piece. A continuing royalty in perpetuity. Not even necessarily any control over use. But every time one of Jack's characters is used, they should get a percentage.
Re: Spidey. Both Jack and Joe Simon have always claimed that they came up with Spider-Man. Stan says it's not true. There's evidence on both sides, and since most of the people involved are dead, we'll likely never know. A lot of it comes down to how honest you think Stan is.
Just_myles
Member
Block Tower said:
Well from what is understood from the Lee standpoint. Kirby was given the opportunity to create Spiderman but passed because he didn't like the idea. So apparently Lee, said fine and moved to Steve Dikto who as we know is responsible for the over aesthetic of spiderman.
Obviously dead men tell no tales, so...
RealDeadOne
Member
I mean yeah Jack did get screwed bad, everyone knows that but the reason this case has been lost time and again for decades is because Marvel very legally screwed him all those years ago.
Kirby's estate deserves a dump truck full of money for every movie that's coming out with his characters but copyright and IP battles are very rarely about what's deserved.
Kirby's estate deserves a dump truck full of money for every movie that's coming out with his characters but copyright and IP battles are very rarely about what's deserved.
Going forward? It's been that way since the 70s. It's why Image was created.
If Marvel could fight them off with Toybiz lawyers, Disney lawyers won't even have to take off their leg weights.
Exactly Avengers get folks shook and now folks have to raise the flag.
RealDeadOne
Member
All the creator rights issues were "solved" by these companies decades ago, in that the creators have no rights at all. It's the main reason why guys like Liefeld went and created Image and how indie comics became a thing again.
That's part of why so few original characters are created (in addition to not selling as well), why put effort into creating something for someone else when you can save your good ideas for your own original works?
Both Marvel and DC have creator owned lines but iI'm not clear on what exactly is owned, but most creators seem to favor going with Image.
It's kind of both. I feel bad for Kirby, but at least he got a lot more recognition than a lot of creators.
huehueeheheh
I agree with all of this. Let's be honest a lot of the interpretations on screen are based on the evolution of characters by more recent creators. The Winter Soldier owes its success in large part to Brubaker and Epting in addition to Simon, Lee or Kirby. The same goes for a lot of other properties.
One more thing which makes me uneasy about the Kirby side is that they had a pretty sleazy lawyer representing them in the past.
Affeinvasion
Member
Well the good thing about comics today is that writers can do both and be successful. There is plenty of room for creator owned comics alongside big two books these days.
The Amazingly-infused Man With Spider Powers!
Man of Iron
American Captain
HUGE-O
Brontes
The Serviceable Seven
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked