• 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.

Gotta Keep Reeducating People on "Whos who" in The Rights And Ownership to SPIDER-MAN

sol_bad

Member
They just did a UK fan event for Venom 2, so spoilers of what the credit scene is are out there:

It's Eddie laying in a bed and Venom asks him if he wants to see one second of what his species went through. Eddie looks strained and something happens, then everything is different. Spider-Man from FFH is seen on the TV, Venom says "He looks tasty" and starts licking the screen and then someone walks in wanting to know what they're doing in their room.

The implication is they jumped universes, likely tied to NWH.

I really hated the first Venom movie and so don't care about being spoiled for the sequels credit scene. If that's what happens, it sounds really really lazy.

Or are we to assume that Doc Oc, Green Goblin etc just change to another reality like switching TV channel?
 

bitbydeath

Member
No we know the outcome, and it's entirely content related with Sony's Spider-Man universe movies (Venom 2, Morbius, Kraven The Hunter). It had nothing to do with game rights. Sony wanted to use Spider-Man in those movies so they were taking him back. Marvel is allowing him and the MCU characters (like Vulture) to show up in those movies and you'll see when those come out. The whole multiverse thing with No Way Home is how they're going to allow it. The credits scene in Venom 2 apparently hints at it.
Sony already had full access to Vulture and Kraven, it was said in the leaked PDF.
 

OneMoreDay

Neo Member
I love how the Spider-Man Ownership Universe (SMOU) just continues to expand. Growing up I never thought I'd see such an ambitious multi-media corporate franchising sphere surrounding my favorite hero. Which global company do you guys think will join the fray next?
 

bitbydeath

Member
Except for the Michael Keaton Vulture. Look at the post above. They can't use the Marvel-produced MCU designs without permission.
Seem to be sidestepping a bit away from the gaming aspect which Square believes they have full control but wasn’t Michael Keaton only used in the Sony Spider-Man movies? I don’t recall him belonging anywhere else prior?
 

ManaByte

Gold Member
Seem to be sidestepping a bit away from the gaming aspect which Square believes they have full control but wasn’t Michael Keaton only used in the Sony Spider-Man movies? I don’t recall him belonging anywhere else prior?

Marvel Studios produced Spider-Man: Homecoming, Spider-Man: Far From Home, and Spider-Man: No Way Home for Sony.
 

ManaByte

Gold Member
The links state Columbia Pictures as one of the producers. Marvel is listed too. It appears it was a joint effort.

Columbia puts up the money for the movie, with Amy Pascal in charge of their money. Marvel Studios takes that money and makes the movies. They use their design departments, concept art teams, stunt teams, vfx, etc.
 

bitbydeath

Member
Columbia puts up the money for the movie, with Amy Pascal in charge of their money. Marvel Studios takes that money and makes the movies. They use their design departments, concept art teams, stunt teams, vfx, etc.
Is there anything stating that somewhere?
Like even here it states Disney and Sony co-produce?
In 2015 the studio struck a deal with Disney and Marvel Studios, to bring Peter Parker and his alter-ego into the MCU.
The deal meant Disney would co-produce
 

sol_bad

Member

"Sony Pictures would continue to own, finance, distribute, and exercise final creative control over the Spider-Man films.[32]"

Final creative control meaning they can really veto something if they don't like it but they aren't in creative control of the actual production.


"“Well, I’ve known all those people for a very long time. Amy Pascal, Tom Rothman, who runs Sony now, I’ve known for years. So, it’s been great. They really are supportive in allowing us to make the creative decisions to make [Spider-Man: Homecoming], but they’ve been great partners. So far so good on that movie.”"
 

ManaByte

Gold Member
Final creative control meaning they can really veto something if they don't like it but they aren't in creative control of the actual production.
The only time that’s happened is that although Feige and the Russos found and wanted Holland, Pascal had to give final approval on his casting. And he was cast in like two days.
 

sol_bad

Member
The only time that’s happened is that although Feige and the Russos found and wanted Holland, Pascal had to give final approval on his casting. And he was cast in like two days.

Yeah I remember hearing about that, happy they got Holland.
 

TGO

Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
No, Marvel owns the character of Spider-Man. Sony has the film rights.

A good recent example was last week's episode of What If...? As it's a 30 min animated show, the Spider-Man rights in there fell under Disney. And due to that Sony didn't allow Tom Holland to voice the character.
You keep saying Character rights but what you really mean is comic book rights and merchandising.
If they own the character rights it would include everything including film rights.
The actual use of the character, which clearly they don't.
They own this

And this


While Sony own this

If anything the rights to the "Character" is shared.
There is no clear cut ownership of the actual character
 

ManaByte

Gold Member
You keep saying Character rights but what you really mean is comic book rights and merchandising.
If they own the character rights it would include everything including film rights.
The actual use of the character, which clearly they don't.
They own this

And this


While Sony own this

If anything the rights to the "Character" is shared.
There is no clear cut ownership of the actual character

Tell that to the US Trademark Office. Marvel Characters owns the trademark on Spider-Man.
 
Top Bottom