| Author |
|
Knut Robert Knutsen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 2006 September 22
Posts: 7374
|
| Posted: 2009 September 21 at 6:20am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Does anyone know what characters they're supposed to be seeking copyright termination for? Because I keep hearing lots of wild speculation and no facts on what time period and what chracters we're talking about. With very few exceptions, Kirby's work until 1970 was done with either Joe Simon or Stan Lee and I haven't heard anything about how this affects them.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Kevin Brown
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 2005 May 31
Location: United States
Posts: 9103
|
| Posted: 2009 September 21 at 6:55am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Knut, pretrty much the entire Marvel Universe up until 1970 was co-created by Jack Kirby. Not all, but a very large, highly recognizable chunk of it. Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, Iron Man... Kirby had his hand in designing or outright creating the characters.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 2008 March 17
Location: Canada
Posts: 16092
|
| Posted: 2009 September 21 at 7:16am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Spider-Man? I know he had an initial go at the design, but am I wrong in thinking that Spidey is 100% Ditko and Lee? edited to add: for clarity, when I say 'he had an initial go', I mean Kirby.
Edited by Peter Martin on 2009 September 21 at 7:17am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Steve De Young
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 2008 April 01
Location: United States
Posts: 3525
|
| Posted: 2009 September 21 at 7:25am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
I think it's in the rights of Kirby's children to try to gain a share of the copyrights.
-----------------------------------------------------
I know this is revisiting a past discussion, but how does anyone have a 'right' to the product of another person's labor?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Adam Hutchinson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 2005 December 15
Location: United States
Posts: 4502
|
| Posted: 2009 September 21 at 7:46am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
I would guess because the "the products of his labor" are considered part of his estate, which is past on to his heirs.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Steve De Young
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 2008 April 01
Location: United States
Posts: 3525
|
| Posted: 2009 September 21 at 7:56am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
I would guess because the "the products of his labor" are considered part of his estate, which is past on to his heirs.
---------------------------------------------------
Estate rights are the right of Kirby to pass on what he owns to his heirs (as designated by him) in so far as he chooses to. The rights were Jack's. Heirs don't have the right, at least in the U.S., to claim pieces of their parents' estates against their parents' wishes.
And of course, this is material which Kirby himself didn't even own, that they're trying to claim on his behalf.
Rewarding people who have done nothing for things that their biological forebears accomplished does nothing to help our society. See Paris Hilton.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Knut Robert Knutsen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 2006 September 22
Posts: 7374
|
| Posted: 2009 September 21 at 8:32am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
"Knut, pretrty much the entire Marvel Universe up until 1970 was co-created by Jack Kirby. " I know what Kirby did. But they're not claiming overship over half the pre 1970 Marvel Universe, are they? Lots of those characters, including Spider-Man, are characters that Kirby doesn't even have bragging rights to. There has to be specific claims to specific characters that is then backed up with evidence. Some of the reports say that the Kirby estate served notice on Sony who only have rights to Spider-Man and Ghost Rider. If they're laying claim to Spider-Man or Ghost Rider, then how is this not frivolous or ill considered? We should know which characters are involved. If they've served 45 legal notices they must have a list of characters that they're claiming. At least a provisional list.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Anthony Frail
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 2007 October 09
Posts: 960
|
| Posted: 2009 September 21 at 8:33am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
QUOTE:
| I know this is revisiting a past discussion, but how does anyone have a 'right' to the product of another person's labor? |
|
|
By being the family of the person. Tha'ts how people usually get their inheritance. I imagien Jack would love for his heirs to receive profit from his work. That was the whole point of him trying to regain his original artwork.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 2004 July 28
Location: United States
Posts: 31476
|
| Posted: 2009 September 21 at 8:35am | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
Well, if his heirs do get some sort of copyright ownership out of this, I do hope Stan gets half.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Steve De Young
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 2008 April 01
Location: United States
Posts: 3525
|
| Posted: 2009 September 21 at 8:57am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
I imagien Jack would love for his heirs to receive profit from his work.
------------------------------------
You imagine, but you don't know. And you don't get inheritance by being biologically related. You get inheritance by someone deciding to leave something to you when you pass on. Maybe Jack didn't like some of his heirs. Maybe he would want one to get everything, and/or some to get nothing. The inheritance rights belonged to Jack. He had the right to pass on his possessions to his heirs (again, as designated by him, not by biology). His heirs have no 'right' to anything.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Adam Hutchinson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 2005 December 15
Location: United States
Posts: 4502
|
| Posted: 2009 September 21 at 9:16am | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
True, but to be fair do you know that he didn't want them to have the benefits of his creations?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Knut Robert Knutsen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 2006 September 22
Posts: 7374
|
| Posted: 2009 September 21 at 10:05am | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
"I do hope Stan gets half." There is no conceivable situation whereby Stan Lee can reclaim any copyright to anything he ever created for Marvel. He was an actual employee of Marvel, mostly as an editor, since he was about 17 years old. None of the work he did in those years could possibly fall outside a work-for-hire situation. The sole possible exception being his Willie Lumpkin strip with Dan DeCarlo (or was it Stan Goldberg). But even then, by bringing Willie Lumpkin into the Marvel Universe himself, he cannot in good faith prevent Marvel from using him (at least in reprints).
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
