Tony Moore Sues Robert Kirkman Over "Walking Dead" Proceeds

[bababooey]

Also a heads up...from reading the complaint.

 

Moore was asked to sign away ALL of his rights to everything. He can't claim copyright or ownership of ANYTHING he created.

 

For that he got 60% of the publishing of issues 1-6 of the comic where he did all the art, cover and interior.

 

BUT it's only 50% of TPB or HC revenues.

 

Since the issues in question were long since out of original print and the only way they would get new revenue from them would be to reprint them as TPB or HC...it's 50% that Moore got for the books he did all the art chores on.

 

And if a HC or TPB has more than issues 1-6 included he only gets 50% of whatever portion of the HC covers issues 1-6.

 

He gets ZERO from the additional 18 issues that he provided cover art for.

 

So he's a co creator with Kirkman and he gets a 50-50 split on comic publishing for only 6 out of 90+ issues, instead of a % ownership in the entire copyright of the series on an ongoing basis.

 

Wow...just wow.

...don't forget the 20% of moving picture revenues.

 

The complaint seems to focus on misrepresenting the need for this unnecessary new deal from 2005 so with this suit you'd have to assume the "20% figure" is lower than what was in place before 2005; I would also guess that nothing has been paid at all if there has been no sharing of figures.

 

As for the deal, I don't see it as that unfair if it's honored.

 

No one is buying the first TPB (50%) nor is there a TV series (20%) without the series being successfully produced since issue 6 (or 24 if you prefer) I think the other properties named in the agreement prove that there IS no value to be split without continued dedication to make the franchise successful.

 

 

How fair it is will be determined by what promises were made or inducement given to sign the deal and if those promises and that inducement were indeed genuine.

 

Also the fairness of the deal can't be determined until we know how they had split rights prior to this deal.

 

If this deal stripped Moore of all his rights of ownership in exchange for a 50% share of comic rights and 20% of movie rights then we've got to know what he had BEFORE this deal to get perspective on it.

I admit I'm assessing "fair" based on the deal I read from 2005 and doing so based on contributions to the series; the prior agreement is only relevant as a measure of the screwing over, misleading etc..

 

Two things make this appear fair to me - Moore didn't stay with the book and if some portion of his lost % went to the 'work for hire' Adlard then I'd applaud that - 20/20/60 seems like a fair split. Secondly, the main value element of this as a property is the "story" - the story is clearly compelling enough for other media to recognize this version of a generic concept as being worthy of the costs associated to adopt this brand rather than develop their own version.

 

Selling this to other media appears to be something done without TM's active involvement so I guess I look at it like someone who has a patent on a device and sells it for a slice of future profits - leaving future production, sales & distribution to others reduces your take.