ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 851
Jul 31 11 12:25 PM
Posts: 1455
Jul 31 11 12:55 PM
Posts: 2776
Jul 31 11 1:03 PM
Golden Age
alexarkadin wrote:Most people have seen examples of the New Gods characters Kirby offered to Marvel in the 60's. The estate argued that the early 60's characters were pitched to Marvel in the same way... Jim Shooter recently described holding Kirby Spiderman character proposal in his hands while at the Marvel offices in 1969. Because Kirby wasn't under contract if it was possible to show Kirby was creating characters and pitching them to Marvel that would constitute work done on spec, just as the New Gods character proposals were done on spec.
Jul 31 11 2:16 PM
Jul 31 11 2:25 PM
Jul 31 11 2:27 PM
Posts: 899
Jul 31 11 2:57 PM
alexarkadin wrote:Lee's contention that he conceived the plots and characters before ever speaking to Kirby is the linchpin of Marvel's case.
Jul 31 11 2:59 PM
alexarkadin wrote:An interesting portion of the judge's ruling is when she describes the creation of the S.H.I.E.L.D. character Nick Fury.The judge say the character was based on a canceled WWll era comic book, and that Lee brought Fury "back to life."Page twenty of her ruling if I recall.
Posts: 8667
Jul 31 11 3:01 PM
BillyBatson4360 wrote:If I understand you correctly, then why aren't the New Gods a property of the Kirby estate? They seem pretty clearly a property of DC Comics as DC has published them and used characters from them in a myriad of other projects and properties. As far as I have ever known or read, the Kirby estate is not receiving royalty payments for those characters.
Jul 31 11 3:12 PM
czeskleba wrote:It seems pretty likely she was confusing Nick Fury with Captain America.
Jul 31 11 3:33 PM
Jul 31 11 3:35 PM
alexarkadin wrote:It's simple really. The judge ruled Kirby's work was work for hire because Lee says he created the characters and plots and gave them to Kirby. If you assume that's the case then everything Kirby contributed came after Lee created the basic plots and characters. If the estate had been able to prove Kirby created characters at home and brought them to Lee then the case would have mirrored the Superman case where it was clear certain aspects of the character had been created before the copyright was sold to DC. As defined by Lee's deposition Kirby was nothing more than an illustrator. Lee says he gave detailed outlines to Kirby, and made changes to the artists pages so keep the story based on his plots in line with his original conceptions in the case the artist had strayed from Lee's intent. You could read every portion of Lee's deposition which has been made public and not find a single thing you could put a name on which Lee credits to Kirby with the exception of The Silver Surfer.
Jul 31 11 3:56 PM
Jul 31 11 4:10 PM
Jul 31 11 4:22 PM
alexarkadin wrote:If the estate had been able to prove Kirby created characters at home and brought them to Lee then the case would have mirrored the Superman case where it was clear certain aspects of the character had been created before the copyright was sold to DC.
Jul 31 11 4:49 PM
Posts: 928
Jul 31 11 4:55 PM
Jul 31 11 5:33 PM
Runguy wrote:I really do not see whether Kirby was exclusive to Marvel or not has any revelance to the case.
Jul 31 11 6:03 PM
Jul 31 11 6:27 PM
alexarkadin wrote:Page 20:"Nick Fury was based on a discontinued series from the WW11 era entitled "Sgt. Fury and His Howling Commandos." Lee brought Fury back to life, and oversaw the creation of the comic book using the Marvel Method. Jack Kirby was assigned to draw the artwork for the series."
Share This