Marvel sues Kirby's heirs

[drewincanada]

[font:Arial Black]Marvel sues comic artist Jack Kirby's heirs to keep Spider-Man, X-Men copyrights[/font]

 

Fri Jan 8, 7:25 PM

By The Associated Press

 

NEW YORK - The home of superheroes including Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four and the X-Men sued one of its most successful artists Friday to retain the rights to the lucrative characters.

 

The federal lawsuit filed Friday in Manhattan by Marvel Worldwide Inc. asks a judge to invalidate 45 notices sent by the heirs of artist Jack Kirby to try to terminate Marvel's copyrights, effective on dates ranging from 2014 through 2019.

 

The heirs notified several companies last year that the rights to the characters would revert from Marvel to Kirby's estate.

 

The lawsuit said Kirby's work on the comics published between 1958 and 1963 were "for hire" and render the heirs' claims invalid.

 

Comic book characters such as Spider-Man and the X-Men have become some of Hollywood's most bankable properties in recent years.

 

Marc Toberoff, an attorney who represents the Kirby heirs, said he hadn't seen the lawsuit and had no immediate comment.

 

The lawsuit said the comic book titles in the notices to which Kirby claims to have contributed include "Amazing Adventures," "Amazing Fantasy," "Amazing Spider-Man," "The Avengers," the "Fantastic Four," "Fantastic Four Annual," "The Incredible Hulk," "Journey into Mystery," "Rawhide Kid," "Sgt. Fury and His Howling Commandos," "Strange Tales," "Tales to Astonish," "Tales of Suspense" and "The X-Men."

 

John Turitzin, a Marvel lawyer, said in a statement that the heirs were trying "to rewrite the history of Kirby's relationship with Marvel."

 

He added: "Everything about Kirby's relationship with Marvel shows that his contributions were works made for hire and that all the copyright interests in them belong to Marvel."

 

Marvel Entertainment, a subsidiary of The Walt Disney Co., sought a judge's order that the Kirby notices have no effect.

[Mr 9.8]

[kimik]

Interesting, although unless they can prove he developed any of the concepts pre-Marvel they do not have as strong a leg to stand on as the Siegel and Shuster heirs.

[TheWatcher]

The lawsuit said the comic book titles in the notices to which Kirby claims to have contributed include "Amazing Adventures," "Amazing Fantasy," "Amazing Spider-Man," "The Avengers," the "Fantastic Four," "Fantastic Four Annual," "The Incredible Hulk," "Journey into Mystery," "Rawhide Kid," "Sgt. Fury and His Howling Commandos," "Strange Tales," "Tales to Astonish," "Tales of Suspense" and "The X-Men."

 

And what title did they forget? Thor, the one with a movie coming out next year Are the Kirby heirs only suing for characters created between '58-'63? If so, then it would leave out Galactus, the Silver Surfer, the Inhumans, Him (Adam Warlock), etc. Don't see the logic in that

[Logan510]

I believe Kirby should get all the credit he deserves....but unfortunately sometime later in his life he started believing what the little birds who had been chirping in his ears were saying. This is how we end up with Kirby actually believing he created Spider-Man and that he "wrote" every issue of FF he ever worked on with Stan Lee.

[drewincanada]

I don't understand the timing of those dates. It implies that Kirby's heirs are claiming that the rights to the characters will revert to them 56 years after they were created. (1958-1963.... revert in 2014-2019.) Why 56 years?

 

Also odd that "Fantastic Four Annual" is on that list. What characters would be in that title that aren't in other titles?

 

I also assume that Kirby's family hasn't filed suit yet for the characters created after 1963.

[drewincanada]

Marvel argues that the company's editors determined which titles Kirby and other creators worked on, "and always retained full editorial control."

 

"If, for example, Marvel gave a writer or artist an assignment to create a comic book story populated with new characters or to illustrate a comic book story with depictions of its characters -- and paid the writer or artist for carrying out the assignment -- the publisher, not the writer or artist, would own the copyright," the press release asserts. "All of Kirby's contributions to Marvel comic books the heirs are claiming for themselves fall into this category."

 

A work made for hire is an exception to the general rule that the person who actually creates a work is the legally-recognized author of that work. According to copyright law in the United States and certain other copyright jurisdictions, if a work is "made for hire", the employer—not the employee—is considered the legal author.

[TheWatcher]

Wasn't Dr. Doom's origin first told in FF Annual 2? Maybe the heirs want to claim Doom's origin so Marvel doesn't try to go and change the character (if they haven't already) to cut them out

[James Howlett]

The lawsuit said the comic book titles in the notices to which Kirby claims to have contributed include "Amazing Adventures," "Amazing Fantasy," "Amazing Spider-Man," "The Avengers," the "Fantastic Four," "Fantastic Four Annual," "The Incredible Hulk," "Journey into Mystery," "Rawhide Kid," "Sgt. Fury and His Howling Commandos," "Strange Tales," "Tales to Astonish," "Tales of Suspense" and "The X-Men."

 

And what title did they forget? Thor, the one with a movie coming out next year Are the Kirby heirs only suing for characters created between '58-'63? If so, then it would leave out Galactus, the Silver Surfer, the Inhumans, Him (Adam Warlock), etc. Don't see the logic in that

 

 

They didn't forget Thor, they're suing for "Journey Into Mystery."

[Subliminal]

I think the family's action will never lead to copyright ownership but probably has the goal of a financial settlement that would close this case once and for all.

[comicparadox]

[font:Arial Black]

Marvel Entertainment, a subsidiary of The Walt Disney Co. [/font]

 

That's the story right there. Disney is uncompromising in defending ownership.

[Mr 9.8]

I think the family's action will never lead to copyright ownership but probably has the goal of a financial settlement that would close this case once and for all.

BINGO!

[asteroid-comix]

Wish I could sue my employers for every software application that I ever wrote.

[Aman619]

if you are really capable and creating valuable software for your company, sit down and renegotiate. If your work is that valuable and irreplaceable, theyd be crazy to let you go. If they can just wheel the next guy in to "create" your work, well, you know.

[TheWatcher]

The lawsuit said the comic book titles in the notices to which Kirby claims to have contributed include "Amazing Adventures," "Amazing Fantasy," "Amazing Spider-Man," "The Avengers," the "Fantastic Four," "Fantastic Four Annual," "The Incredible Hulk," "Journey into Mystery," "Rawhide Kid," "Sgt. Fury and His Howling Commandos," "Strange Tales," "Tales to Astonish," "Tales of Suspense" and "The X-Men."

 

And what title did they forget? Thor, the one with a movie coming out next year Are the Kirby heirs only suing for characters created between '58-'63? If so, then it would leave out Galactus, the Silver Surfer, the Inhumans, Him (Adam Warlock), etc. Don't see the logic in that

 

 

They didn't forget Thor, they're suing for "Journey Into Mystery."

 

Different titles. If they don't sue over "Thor", then Kirby can't get credit for creating/co-creating any new characters introduced in that comic (while he was drawing it)

[ivegotneatstuff]

I believe Kirby should get all the credit he deserves....but unfortunately sometime later in his life he started believing what the little birds who had been chirping in his ears were saying. This is how we end up with Kirby actually believing he created Spider-Man and that he "wrote" every issue of FF he ever worked on with Stan Lee.

 

I don't know if what's on Wikipedia is true or not...but

 

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-man

 

 

Comics historian Greg Theakston says that Lee, after receiving Goodman's approval for the name Spider-Man and the "ordinary teen" concept, approached artist Jack Kirby. Kirby told Lee about an unpublished character on which he collaborated with Joe Simon in the 1950s, in which an orphaned boy living with an old couple finds a magic ring that granted him super-human powers. Lee and Kirby "immediately sat down for a story conference" and Lee afterward directed Kirby to flesh out the character and draw some pages. Steve Ditko would be the inker.[note 3] When Kirby showed Lee the first six pages, Lee recalled, "I hated the way he was doing it! Not that he did it badly -- it just wasn't the character I wanted; it was too heroic".[6]:12 Lee turned to Ditko, who developed a visual style Lee found satisfactory. Ditko recalled:

“ "One of the first things I did was to work up a costume. A vital, visual part of the character. I had to know how he looked ... before I did any breakdowns. For example: A clinging power so he wouldn't have hard shoes or boots, a hidden wrist-shooter versus a web gun and holster, etc. ... I wasn't sure Stan would like the idea of covering the character's face but I did it because it hid an obviously boyish face. It would also add mystery to the character...."[7] ”

Amazing Fantasy #15 (August 1962). Cover art by Jack Kirby (penciller) & Steve Ditko (inker).

 

In an early recollection of the character's creation, Ditko described his and Lee's contributions in a mail interview with Gary Martin published in Comic Fan #2 (Summer 1965): "Stan Lee thought the name up. I did costume, web gimmick on wrist & spider signal."[8] At the time, Ditko shared a Manhattan studio with noted fetish artist Eric Stanton, an art-school classmate who, in a 1988 interview with Theakston, recalled that although his contribution to Spider-Man was "almost nil", he and Ditko had "worked on storyboards together and I added a few ideas. But the whole thing was created by Steve on his own... I think I added the business about the webs coming out of his hands".[6]:14

 

Kirby disputed Lee's version of the story, and claimed Lee had minimal involvement in the character's creation. According to Kirby, the idea for Spider-Man had originated with Kirby and Joe Simon, who in the 1950s had developed a character called The Silver Spider for the Crestwood comic Black Magic, who was subsequently not used.[note 4] Simon, in his 1990 autobiography, disputed Kirby's account, asserting that Black Magic was not a factor, and that he (Simon) devised the name "Spider-Man" (later changed to "The Silver Spider"), while Kirby outlined the character's story and powers. Simon later elaborated that his and Kirby's character conception became the basis for Simon's Archie Comics superhero the Fly. Artist Steve Ditko stated that Lee liked the name Hawkman from DC Comics, and that "Spider-Man" was an outgrowth of that interest.[7] The hyphen was included in the character's name to avoid confusion with DC Comics' Superman.[9]

 

Simon concurred that Kirby had shown the original Spider-Man version to Lee, who liked the idea and assigned Kirby to draw sample pages of the new character but disliked the results—in Simon's description, "Captain America with cobwebs".[note 5] Writer Mark Evanier notes that Lee's reasoning that Kirby's character was too heroic seems unlikely—Kirby still drew the covers for the first issues of Spider-Man. Likewise, Kirby's given reason that he was "too busy" to also draw Spider-Man in addition to his other duties seems false, as Kirby was, in Evanier's words, "always busy".[10]:127 Neither Lee's nor Kirby's explanation explains why key story elements like the magic ring were dropped; Evanier states that the most plausible explanation for the sudden change was that Goodman, or one of his assistants, decided that Spider-Man as drawn and envisioned by Kirby was too similar to the Fly.[10]:127

[TheWatcher]

Here's Kirby's version of Spider-Man

 

[comicwiz]

if you are really capable and creating valuable software for your company, sit down and renegotiate. If your work is that valuable and irreplaceable, theyd be crazy to let you go. If they can just wheel the next guy in to "create" your work, well, you know.

 

This is never an easy thing to do. With software development, the employer would very likely have you sign a confidentiality and non-disclosure even before you have a chance to open your mouth and put your fingers on the keyboard Then they would provide you with a chair, desk, computer with licensing for all software in place in order for you to perform your work. The network to share your work and collaborate if you are part of a team. Teasing out elements of source from a project and attempting to reclaim them on the basis of individual merit is far too complicated and trying to do this after the software attains any degree of success would likely mean management having a good laugh at the developers expense and showing them to the door.

 

The idea of negotiating with an employer can only be made possible if a developer walks in with a concept on his own computer (notebook), presents it to the employer, and in doing so remains in the drivers seat throughout every step of the way. It's also worth noting that there would need to be a distinct, attributable level of knowledge and skill-set attached to the concept or project that is non-transferable and cannot be related to any work they performed during their employment term for the company to even consider taking a share of the pie rather than walking away and building it themselves. If it can be proven in any way, shape or form as derivative work carried out during their employment term, the developer might just as well hand over the entire notebook.

 

As unfair as it seems (and I think this is in a nutshell what franksbearss was trying to allude to with his comment and in comparing developers to artists during Kirby's tenure with Marvel), the work created by most developers is regarded as piece work (work for hire). The very few exceptions that exist where original founders are still very much an active part of the software they developed are cases where the developers took command of the drivers seat from the very beginning.

[benz]

we need a lawyer here, esquire or foolkiller? =)

[comicwiz]

we need a lawyer here, esquire or foolkiller? =)