Read all about it here...
No real surprises here. Disney employs the best copyright lawyers on Earth.
No real surprises here. Disney employs the best copyright lawyers on Earth.
Last edited:
The difference is that Marvel has always appeared to have the presumption of ownership regarding its characters, whereas DC doesn't have a leg to stand on in claiming that Superman was work-for-hire.Warners take note with Superman.
Marvel just keeps edging them out in every arena.
Sells.
Movie quality
Legal battles.
The difference is that Marvel has always appeared to have the presumption of ownership regarding its characters, whereas DC doesn't have a leg to stand on in claiming that Superman was work-for-hire.Warners take note with Superman.
Marvel just keeps edging them out in every arena.
Sells.
Movie quality
Legal battles.
Handling of Wonder Woman character.Marvel just keeps edging them out in every arena.
Sells.
Movie quality
Legal battles.
They were paid. Sorry scale at the time was what it was but you chose to work there. I'm over this Superman stuff. If the creators had honest to goodness made the character into what he was, even during the 40's all on their own that would be one thing. They didn't. They've been paid. I'm just not with the family's complaint and I'll leave it at that regardless of any retorts.The difference is that Marvel has always appeared to have the presumption of ownership regarding its characters, whereas DC doesn't have a leg to stand on in claiming that Superman was work-for-hire.Warners take note with Superman.
Marvel just keeps edging them out in every arena.
Sells.
Movie quality
Legal battles.
This.
Once again, that has nothing to do with it. DC could have paid them a million dollars in 1938 money and the Siegel/Shuster estates would still own the copyright. DC purchased the copyright for its original existence, 54 years. When Congress extended copyrights, they specified that anything not work-for-hire would revert to its original owners - otherwise DC is (and, since 1994, has been) profitting from something they never paid for.They were paid. Sorry scale at the time was what it was but you chose to work there...I'm just not with the family's complaint and I'll leave it at that regardless of any retorts.
Once again, that has nothing to do with it. DC could have paid them a million dollars in 1938 money and the Siegel/Shuster estates would still own the copyright. DC purchased the copyright for its original existence, 54 years. When Congress extended copyrights, they specified that anything not work-for-hire would revert to its original owners - otherwise DC is (and, since 1994, has been) profitting from something they never paid for.They were paid. Sorry scale at the time was what it was but you chose to work there...I'm just not with the family's complaint and I'll leave it at that regardless of any retorts.
The difference is that Marvel has always appeared to have the presumption of ownership regarding its characters, whereas DC doesn't have a leg to stand on in claiming that Superman was work-for-hire.Warners take note with Superman.
Marvel just keeps edging them out in every arena.
Sells.
Movie quality
Legal battles.
Once again, that has nothing to do with it. DC could have paid them a million dollars in 1938 money and the Siegel/Shuster estates would still own the copyright. DC purchased the copyright for its original existence, 54 years. When Congress extended copyrights, they specified that anything not work-for-hire would revert to its original owners - otherwise DC is (and, since 1994, has been) profitting from something they never paid for.They were paid. Sorry scale at the time was what it was but you chose to work there...I'm just not with the family's complaint and I'll leave it at that regardless of any retorts.
This. Siegel heirs should have a big payday come 2013.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.