Spoilers Marvel Cinematic Universe spoiler-heavy speculation thread
- Thread starter bbjeg
- Start date
From what I can see online, Neil sold all rights to her.
A few quick points.
First, back in the late 30s/early 40s, there were lots of independent comic companies. However, as often happens, many were bought out or forced out of business by the companies that eventually because DC and Marvel. For a look at how truly ugly this sometimes got, please see the example of DC suing Fawcett (publisher of Captain Marvel, now Shazam) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Comics_Publications,_Inc._v._Fawcett_Publications,_Inc.
Also, comics and other things like movies, syndicated TV, etc. are dependent on the distributor(s). While those are (mostly) unproven, the comic companies who survived often did so because of tight ties with distributors. For example, in 1937, DC was in debt to Harry Donenfeld, who was a pulp magazine publisher, printing-plant owner, and magazine distributor, so they ended up taking him on as a partner. Marvel's founder, Martin Goodman, also owned a newsstand-distribution company. I think they call that "vertical integration" now.
Second, revenue streams are somewhat relevant because nobody in those early days could have foreseen the movie, merchandising, and later TV and now digital money that these characters would bring in.
Third, you are incorrect about royalties. This has changed A LOT in the last few decades, thanks to organizing by creators since about the late 60s. When I saw Denny O'Neil at a con not long before his death in 2020, he said he'd gotten a check recently for an appearance by Maxie Zeus, a character he created for Batman comics in the 70s/80s. It all depends on your contract. George Perez was able to retire recently (health problems) because of the contracts he had with DC. The late comics writer Len Wein said he received more payments from Lucius Fox's appearance in the Batman films — he co-created the character — than he did for another co-creation, Wolverine, despite the success of the X-Men films (https://smallbusiness.chron.com/much-comic-book-artist-make-per-project-12942.html). Obviously, the more popular the character and/or creator, the more leverage they have in their contract negotiations.
It all comes down to contracts. Even then, none of the people you mentioned that get royalties have any right to ownership of their characters, and royalties aren't owed at all to any comic creator who didn't have a contract saying that they would be. So, it all still comes down to people not being owed shit. Steve Ditko would be owed nothing even if he was alive, and sure as hell had no rights to the characters he co-created, unless the family can produce some long hidden secret contract he signed.
Revenue streams are irrelevant because no one was going to quit the Big 2 because they thought they could create a billion dollar franchise even if they'd known of the possibility. Marvel (and to a much lesser extent, some DC) movies make money because they're made by the MCU (and, rarely, random WB/DC hired) people. If Steve Ditko had created, say, a character like Dr. Strange for himself, the character would have been forgotten a few months after debut and definitely wouldn't have became a major movie, so he wouldn't have made any extra money anyway.
The amount of creator owned comic properties that become successful in other media is minuscule, and its even smaller in movies then in TV. Basically no one is going to be the next Walking Dead for TV or, I guess, Hellboy for movies (but even Hellboy only worked because it got Del Toro, the second he wasn't involved the next hellboy movie flopped). Even Spawn, one of the most successful independently owned comics, only got a decent but short lived cartoon and a single crappy movie. Marvel/DC, the companies that own them and the people that work for them are who make the billion dollar franchises, indy comic stuff is lucky to get anything outside of the comics.
So comic creators work for the Big 2 because they either like the Big 2's characters or know its the only place most aspiring comic writers/artists/etc will ever make money, and they have to deal with what that means. They are only owed what their contracts say, they basically never have any rights to any characters they create or co-create, but they wouldn't be making huge franchises out of their ideas outside of Marvel/DC anyway in 99% of cases, which is why most comic book people (at least in the US, and definitely the ones interested in superhero comics) work for the Big 2 companies and don't just do indy work.
I think you misunderstand what these lawsuits are about. The issue isn't whether or not Marvel owns these characters, which isn't up for debate.
The issue, as I understand it, is whether these characters were sold to Marvel or done as work for hire. If it's work for hire, Marvel still owns them. But if they were sold to Marvel, then rights can revert to the creator after X number of years due to complicated reasons born out of the history of copyright law.
What makes it tricky is that Marvel in those early days was such a fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants operation that it's not clear cut which category the work belongs in. "Why not just look at what the original contract says?" you ask. No such contract exists, or at least no longer does. That's why it's tricky.
This is an incredibly blinkered view of the medium and industry.
The issue, as I understand it, is whether these characters were sold to Marvel or done as work for hire. If it's work for hire, Marvel still owns them. But if they were sold to Marvel, then rights can revert to the creator after X number of years due to complicated reasons born out of the history of copyright law.
What makes it tricky is that Marvel in those early days was such a fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants operation that it's not clear cut which category the work belongs in. "Why not just look at what the original contract says?" you ask. No such contract exists, or at least no longer does. That's why it's tricky.
This is an incredibly blinkered view of the medium and industry.
Last edited:
A few quick points.
First, back in the late 30s/early 40s, there were lots of independent comic companies. However, as often happens, many were bought out or forced out of business by the companies that eventually because DC and Marvel. For a look at how truly ugly this sometimes got, please see the example of DC suing Fawcett (publisher of Captain Marvel, now Shazam) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Comics_Publications,_Inc._v._Fawcett_Publications,_Inc.
Also, comics and other things like movies, syndicated TV, etc. are dependent on the distributor(s). While those are (mostly) unproven, the comic companies who survived often did so because of tight ties with distributors. For example, in 1937, DC was in debt to Harry Donenfeld, who was a pulp magazine publisher, printing-plant owner, and magazine distributor, so they ended up taking him on as a partner. Marvel's founder, Martin Goodman, also owned a newsstand-distribution company. I think they call that "vertical integration" now.
Second, revenue streams are somewhat relevant because nobody in those early days could have foreseen the movie, merchandising, and later TV and now digital money that these characters would bring in.
Third, you are incorrect about royalties. This has changed A LOT in the last few decades, thanks to organizing by creators since about the late 60s. When I saw Denny O'Neil at a con not long before his death in 2020, he said he'd gotten a check recently for an appearance by Maxie Zeus, a character he created for Batman comics in the 70s/80s. It all depends on your contract. George Perez was able to retire recently (health problems) because of the contracts he had with DC. The late comics writer Len Wein said he received more payments from Lucius Fox's appearance in the Batman films — he co-created the character — than he did for another co-creation, Wolverine, despite the success of the X-Men films (https://smallbusiness.chron.com/much-comic-book-artist-make-per-project-12942.html). Obviously, the more popular the character and/or creator, the more leverage they have in their contract negotiations.
Good observations, and free of fanboy pumping of the supremacy of the so-named "Big two".
We have our Adam Warlock
https://deadline.com/2021/10/guardi...ter-1234853679/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
https://deadline.com/2021/10/guardi...ter-1234853679/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
Finally!
Even though his arrival was heavily hinted by Vol. 2's mid-credits scene, it's good to have it finally confirmed (especially since Gunn had been cagey about the subject in the past, both before his firing and after his rehiring). I really like the casting of Will Poulter who've I liked in Black Mirror: Bandersnatch, Midsommar, and The Underground Railroad. I look forward to seeing what he brings to the role.
Even though his arrival was heavily hinted by Vol. 2's mid-credits scene, it's good to have it finally confirmed (especially since Gunn had been cagey about the subject in the past, both before his firing and after his rehiring). I really like the casting of Will Poulter who've I liked in Black Mirror: Bandersnatch, Midsommar, and The Underground Railroad. I look forward to seeing what he brings to the role.
I think the casting is perfect! Granted, we don't know how far from the source material Gunn might stray, but so far, so good!
(And even with his own take, I'm still excited, these aren't literal translations)
(And even with his own take, I'm still excited, these aren't literal translations)
I think that boat has sailed, since Warlock was created by a cabal of human scientists.
That's a good point, though I was more talking about his demeanor/character/spirit than origin. Many of the characters have different origins (Banner will never be hit by the explosion of a bomb he's testing in the desert, for example) but they're good at maintaining the spirit for the most part.
Speaking of. We need Rick Jones!
He is listed under Banner's known associates in the opening credits of The Incredible Hulk.
These issues are a lot more complicated than you make it sound, and there is a lot of legal technicality mumbo jumbo involved that the majority of us could never begin to understand.
Thank you!
Looks like the days of release delays aren't as over as it appeared. Everything's just been pushed out.
https://variety.com/2021/film/news/disney-delays-doctor-strange-thor-black-panther-1235091673/
https://variety.com/2021/film/news/disney-delays-doctor-strange-thor-black-panther-1235091673/
