Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2.fluke 9/24/84; site colossus.fluke.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!fluke!moriarty
From: moriarty@fluke.UUCP (Andrew Sigel, posting via Moriarty)
Newsgroups: net.comics
Subject: Creators rights at Marvel
Message-ID: <2641@colossus.fluke.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 27-Jan-86 11:39:34 EST
Article-I.D.: colossus.2641
Posted: Mon Jan 27 11:39:34 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 31-Jan-86 02:36:54 EST
Reply-To: sigel%umass.bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA
Distribution: na
Organization: UMass
Lines: 37

After Marvel has gone on record in print saying that they are leaders or
pioneers (or whatever it was, precisely, that they did say) in the field
of creators rights, I think it only right that they be hoist on their own
petard when the truth comes out.  Feeling rather vindictive this week
(must be the start of the spring semester), I hope Kirby takes them to
the cleaners.

Copyright is one of those very messy topics.  And one of the messier parts
of the law is copyright renewal; who gets the rights to the character.
Fairly often, all rights revert at renewal time, and that is what Marvel
is worried about; that Kirby will prove a claim to the creation of at
least some part of the Marvel Universe, and they will have to pay through
the nose to keep rights they have come to think of as theirs.

If Kirby never signed any permanent rights over to Marvel, they could be
in severe trouble.  If they're smart, they'll do what they should have
done years ago, and give him some kind of royalties, and the artwork
they owe him.  DC finally bowed under to pressure years ago, and started
paying some (rather token, compared to the revenues generated) royalties
to Siegel and Schuster, creators of Superman.  I'm assuming that Kirby
was not working under a "work for hire" contract while at Marvel; in
small companies (as Timely was), they may not have thought of it.  I have
seen books originally copyrighted to a publishing company be renewed in the
name of the author.

One major factor, of course, is that Marvel has far more money than Kirby
to spend on litigation, should it come to this.  Of course, it only takes
one ruling restraining Marvel from using the characters until the trial
is over to create havoc.  If it turns out Kirby's claims are without
merit (and I have no idea what the original copyrights looked like, or
Kirby's contracts), then Marvel can continue getting away with treating
their founders and creators like dirt, while claiming that they are
treating them like gold.  If Kirby's claims have any kind of merit, the
dirt they are using for creators could turn out to be their own graves.
It'll be an interesting next few years....

                                     Andrew Sigel