ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 71
Jul 29 11 9:29 PM
BillyBatson4360 wrote:Because the Spider-Man movies carried a credit for Steve Ditko (who has never sued Marvel and has been very vocal about not suing Marvel)..
Because every Marvel movie since the first X-Men has carried accurate creator credits.
Posts: 1238
Jul 29 11 9:32 PM
profh0011 wrote:It's a DISGRACE. An entire message board full of trolls CELEBRATING the triumph of a FACELESS CORPORATION over a CREATOR. A corporation which has infinite financial resources at its disposal, which CREATES NOTHING, and which continues to OWN and CONTROL the work of others, because of outdated CRIMINAL GANGSTER mentality and behavior.
Posts: 235
Jul 29 11 9:46 PM
Posts: 1816
Jul 29 11 10:28 PM
profh0011 wrote: It's a DISGRACE. An entire message board full of trolls CELEBRATING the triumph of a FACELESS CORPORATION over a CREATOR. A corporation which has infinite financial resources at its disposal, which CREATES NOTHING, and which continues to OWN and CONTROL the work of others, because of outdated CRIMINAL GANGSTER mentality and behavior.Congratulations. Personally, few things would please me more than to see both Marvel and DC go BELLY UP and disappear from the face of the planet. Maybe then, actual creators with new, fresh ideas and characters might have a chance to thrive.
Posts: 14376
Jul 29 11 10:45 PM
Registered Member
profh0011 wrote:It's a DISGRACE. An entire message board full of trolls CELEBRATING the triumph of a FACELESS CORPORATION over a CREATOR. A corporation which has infinite financial resources at its disposal, which CREATES NOTHING, and which continues to OWN and CONTROL the work of others, because of outdated CRIMINAL GANGSTER mentality and behavior. Congratulations. Personally, few things would please me more than to see both Marvel and DC go BELLY UP and disappear from the face of the planet. Maybe then, actual creators with new, fresh ideas and characters might have a chance to thrive.
Posts: 1897
Jul 29 11 11:44 PM
Posts: 895
Jul 30 11 4:31 AM
richard63 wrote: profh0011 wrote: It's a DISGRACE. An entire message board full of trolls CELEBRATING the triumph of a FACELESS CORPORATION over a CREATOR. A corporation which has infinite financial resources at its disposal, which CREATES NOTHING, and which continues to OWN and CONTROL the work of others, because of outdated CRIMINAL GANGSTER mentality and behavior.Hmm - not sure that I've seen too many people "celebrating". Even if they did "celebrate" not sure why it would be a "DISGRACE" in capital letters - perhaps you could explain? Also, not sure which creator they have triumphed over as sadly, Mr Kirby was not in court. Not sure why you think that Marvel are like a "CRIMINAL GANGSTER" - they are operating as any company with stockholders would operate. Personally, I would say that the decision sounds like the correct one - obviously its a disappointment for the heirs to the Kirby estate who were hoping to make a buck or two.
profh0011 wrote: It's a DISGRACE. An entire message board full of trolls CELEBRATING the triumph of a FACELESS CORPORATION over a CREATOR. A corporation which has infinite financial resources at its disposal, which CREATES NOTHING, and which continues to OWN and CONTROL the work of others, because of outdated CRIMINAL GANGSTER mentality and behavior.
Posts: 1838
Jul 30 11 9:01 AM
Posts: 14425
Jul 30 11 9:18 AM
Golden Age
famac wrote:The bank loans you the money for your house, and they are horrible mosters for expecting you to pay it back.
Posts: 8154
Jul 30 11 11:17 AM
Posts: 2776
Jul 30 11 12:06 PM
DNAlien wrote:Ditko has "been very vocal about not suing Marvel"? Where has he said one word on the record about whether he would or would not sue Marvel? He hasn't sued Marvel (but I think the copyright termination window for his major creations isn't even open yet, or if it is open will stay open for a good while yet), but not suing isn't the same as being "very vocal" about not doing so.
DNAlien wrote:Well, maybe if you find weak "based on the comics by..." or "special thanks to..." type credits accurate. I think an accurate credit would be "Fantastic Four created by Jack Kirby and ...", which I haven't seen (but I haven't watched most of them). I also seem to recall there was some hubbub about the second Hulk movie and the Wolverine movie and others not including even those weak credits.
Jul 30 11 12:38 PM
profh0011 wrote:Personally, few things would please me more than to see both Marvel and DC go BELLY UP and disappear from the face of the planet. Maybe then, actual creators with new, fresh ideas and characters might have a chance to thrive.
Posts: 10379
Jul 30 11 1:28 PM
I'm not sure what you mean by "the copyright window" as the Kirby estate suit doesn't appear to center on a copyright expiration/reclamation issue (as Joe Simon's suit did), but on the original working conditions (the "work for hire" vs. not "work for hire" argument).
Posts: 899
Jul 30 11 1:39 PM
famac wrote:Finally, and I've made this point before: what did Kirby really create in Marvel's franchise?
Posts: 1095
Bronze Age
famac wrote:But it does. If he had a grievance, wouldn't it be addressed in his new employment contract? He accepted the very same employment contract - when we know they wanted him to take Fantastic Four - he refused and gave them new characters instead!! (I think the Cap run was agreed to as a condition of employment - he didn't want to do it - he fancied himself the idea man - as work for hire).
Posts: 1327
Jul 30 11 3:27 PM
Jul 30 11 3:51 PM
Fin Fang Foom wrote:Copyright Law (as it was last revised) offers limited opportunity under specific circumstances to reclaim ownership of some work, within a narrow window of opportunity. I believe that's what this suit was based on -- the question of how the work had been created had to be answered to determine eligibility to reclaim the copyright.
Jul 30 11 5:04 PM
BillyBatson4360 wrote:I can't really point to a specific source,
As I understand it (and others may correct me if I am wrong), Ditko has also not been interested in receiving royalty payments for his earlier work
I'm not sure what you mean by "the copyright window" as the Kirby estate suit doesn't appear to center on a copyright expiration/reclamation issue
Second, I don't find a "Based on the comics by" credit confusing in the slightest. Nor do I think it confusing to the average movie goer. The comics are the source material. The guys named in the credit are the guys who created the comic. What else could it possibly mean?
Jul 30 11 6:38 PM
Posts: 5920
Jul 30 11 6:42 PM
Share This