tth2

Graded pulps are starting to pour onto the 'bay, many with crazy prices. A look at "sold" listings shows very few greater fools so far from what I can see. 
I guess we'll see if fear crushes greed as happens in exuberant markets from time to time, or vice versa...

Classics Illustrated are the bellwether of the hobby, prices having stayed virtually stagnant since the beginning of fandom. If they start dropping in price the end is surely upon us.

Here's my one and only Promise book...so far.

Well my first eagle has landed. My first submission to CGC. I dropped this off at WonderCon on 3/29 and got it today. Quicker than I expected. Came back a little better than I expected. I had it at 7.0 so I guess my grading skills aren’t too bad. This slab is THICK! I will have to add on to the comic room if I keep doing this. Now, I wait for my two “value” submissions…
 

I had reason to be on the Walt Disney Studios lot yesterday and went over to see if I could snap a picture of the Carl Barks Legends plaque. I found it fairly quickly and snapped my photo. I wanted to look for Walt Kelly but I am not sure if he was ever given a plaque or not. I know I have seen Kay Kamen (KK Publications) before but did not see it on this trip. Enjoy!

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.

A Comiclink win! This one i have been wanting for a bit! Comiclink is gonna have some big ones I want next auction so im getting my wallet ready.

I exaggerate for humorous effect, but the post I was responding to:
 
I would not strip them of the characters, just end the monopoly of a soulless corporation whose current staff had zero involvement in their creation.
DC and Marvel have given these characters to dozens of creators, who have created wildly inconsistent versions with barely a thought for continuity.  For the record, I, and most folks, care only a little about continuity.  (This is easily proven by observing how little continuity errors have done to prevent the continued popularity of Batman and Superman across the decades.)
Let all who wish try their hand with these characters.  The best will survive, the worst will be forgotten.

Disney has done very little with the character, mostly out of fear of damaging the brand.  Mickey was an exciting character in the first cartoons.  His newspaper strip adventures were exciting and funny.  If you won't use a character, then release him back to the wild to let others take a swing. 
Bad stuff will be created. Good stuff will be created.  Ignore what you dislike and give attention to what you like.  I'm completely unbothered by the lack of continuity with respect to a great character like Sherlock Holmes.  I'm immune to impact due to stupid adaptions, and I don't see any particular societal breakdown arising from them.

Continuity when you have a company with 8 titles and only 2-4 years of storylines is do-able-- it's not when you've got 80+ years of story.   
Having said that, I'm a huge fan of Tarzan and Sherlock Holmes, read all the books, but when they make a film or TV adaption not only does it usually not fit my idea of the character, I feel no obligation to watch it, so I could care less what they do.    For Batman, I'll always have what I consider the "Correct" version and am A-OK with other versions existing.

Dudes been cleaned and pressed more times than I can count.

I think DC has done a great job of messing up these characters on their own.   Bring on the freedom of PD.

Honestly, beats me too!  But I do think it’s restored by virtue of no salesmanship for the book.  That would not be possible if it was a HG unrestored copy in that apparent condition. We’d be getting a torrent of Metro pumping. As would any auction house. 

Yes

I was expecting a restored, raw Action 1 to show up at either Heritage or C-connect.  Most likely, the one we are discussing is that book.

Copyrights and patents were mentioned in the US Constitution because it was thought that some protection for them would encourage investment of time and resources required to invent things. 
It was expected the protections would be of limited duration because nothing is completely new.  Those who invent were standing on shoulders of giants who preceded them, and to restrict re-use of new inventions was to over-reward inventors and delay further advancements.

Roger with it 

FTFY

Stories and characters from Alexandre Dumas, Robert Louis Stevenson, and Jules Verne have been leveraged by a variety of creators without damaging the reputation of the originators. The bad adaptations have not prevented others from trying their hand at the material.

Great idea, but now its in the public domain.
The Winnie the Pooh horror movie made a couple million off a $100K budget. My guess is that its not real high quality, but I have not seen it (and don't intend to). That's the kind of cheap exploitation I would expect to occur initially. 
But, on the other hand, there's been some brilliant post-expiration work on Sherlock Holmes. Young Sherlock, Enola Holmes, a number of straight up Sherlocks, like Benedict C's, have all been pretty brilliant. 

DC's Superman and Batman properties are therefore an excellent example of why it's not only not necessary to have expiration dates based on creation dates, but why basing these expiration dates on creation dates is an absolutely harebrained idea. For Superman and Batman to enter the public domain and thus have multiple publishers and thus storylines is beyond ridiculous.

Since the copyrights are good for post 1978 creations until 70 years after the creator dies, e.g., Harry Potter's clock has not even begun to click, it seems unlikely that there will be much of a deterrent to new creations. Someone like J.K. Rowling shows the incentive to create is to become a billionaire off of a zero investment story, and a constant stream of funds in a market with no competitors that has already run 27 years with another 70 years to go after she dies, which may not be for another 25 plus years (she's 58 now). If so, that would lead to copyright protection lasting 122 years. That should inure not only to her benefit but also her three kids who will all be dead under this scenario before the copyright expires (one born before the book came out and the other two in the early 2000s), and her grandkids (who will be born soon - next ten years or so - if she's going to have any) who might also die before the copyrights expire. 
So, no, I don't see existing copyright laws as a deterrent at all.
 

No one is talking about eliminating intellectual property rights.
Copyright protections are meant to encourage creativity.
Copyright protections that last too long stifle creativity.
Copyright protections have always expired a certain amount of time after the death of the creator. That allows others to build on and use old works for creative endeavors.
Large corporations don't usually die (although some go defunct), which is why it is necessary to have an expiration date based on when a work is first created or published.
Right now, the timeframe for copyright protections is excessive.

I strongly disagree.
I don't see how anyone but DC should have the right to Superman and Batman these days.

 

They should have entered the public domain a long time ago. The 1998 Copyright Protection Act was yet another example of Congress placing corporate interests above public interest.