tth2

That was a lot of money back then! $30 for a comic might as well have been $3000 as far as I was concerned, because they were both equally unaffordable (and would have been rejected just as quickly by my parents).

GSX 1 and UXM 94 were no great shakes for a long time and didn't command higher prices until Byrne took over and the series' popularity really soared. During the original Cockrum run, none of my fellow comic collectors in middle school thought much of the new X-Men. But then Byrne took over, Wolverine suddenly became popular and everyone started getting into them. That's when the prices of GSX 1 and UXM 94 started to skyrocket (relatively speaking).

I vividly remember buying X-Men 94 off the newsstand at the airport in San Diego while my family was on vacation. I was surprised to see X-Men because it had been on hiatus for a while, after having been a reprint book for several years. As I hadn't bought (or even heard of) GSX 1, I was confused by what was going on as well, but still found it to be interesting and continued to buy the new series. Plus, there were a few elements that pulled me in. I knew Dave Cockrum from the Legion of Superheroes and liked how he was revamping the X-Men's costumes to look more like the Legion's costumes. I remembered several of the new characters--Banshee because his original appearance had been relatively recently reprinted in the X-Men, Wolverine because I remembered his appearance in Hulk (although I didn't think he was a big deal) and Sunfire from a recent appearance in Sub-Mariner (although he didn't stay, of course).

It's only propaganda if you're on the losing side. As the saying goes, history is written by the victors.

The company won't be stripped of these characters. They can continue to produce Superman & Batman comics just like they've always done. And they will also have a huge advantage over others using those characters because DC has superior distribution channels and commands more and better shelf space. Just because someone writes their own Batman comic doesn't mean that they'll be able to get comic stores to carry their comic, or imagine trying to sell it directly online and get a Google search result for your Batman comic to appear ahead of all of the search results relating to the DC Batman. Similarly, just because somebody wants to make a Batman movie doesn't mean that they'll be able to get a studio to do it or to distribute it.

Which would explain Vinnie's casual handling of the book. I mean, if it's already restored and gets a little more damage, what's a little more restoration between friends?

I'm always confused in these kinds of situations as to which is the correct answer. If I say I'm sure it's a restored copy, does that mean I'm taking the "over" or the "under"?

Privately owned corporations didn't exist in Shakespeare's day. The assumption was that IP rights belonged to individuals, who would eventually die, and that created a natural expiration of IP protection. Corporations, which can in theory live forever, have distorted the original intention of IP protection. If corporations should be able to hold on to copyrights forever, then why shouldn't they also be allowed to hold on to patents forever? I'm not aware that Disney has suffered any great harm (or harm at all) as a result of losing its copyright protection over the earliest versions of Mickey Mouse.

I don’t even treat my Strawberry Shortcakes that way !

the way Vinnie went at the packaging, I was convinced it was the reprint copy If you little people had handled as many copies of Action 1 as Vinnie has, you'd be casual about it too!

No wonder I never noticed it.

Just use multiple standard boards to achieve the desired firmness.

There was one besides that.

Ah, of course, the Church Captain America #1. I knew there was a major Church Timely hero book I was overlooking.