Marvel & Jack Kirby Heirs Settle Legal Battle Ahead Of Supreme Court Showdown

[topofthetotem]

I dont understand why the heirs get anything at all, they didn't create bull squat.

Neither did Disney executives and shareholders

there are 4 billion reasons to disagree with you.

[dupont2005]

I dont understand why the heirs get anything at all, they didn't create bull squat.

Neither did Disney executives and shareholders

there are 4 billion reasons to disagree with you.

No amount of money is going to change facts. Not a single Disney shareholder has created a single thing credited to Kirby.

[topofthetotem]

I dont understand why the heirs get anything at all, they didn't create bull squat.

Neither did Disney executives and shareholders

there are 4 billion reasons to disagree with you.

No amount of money is going to change facts. Not a single Disney shareholder has created a single thing credited to Kirby.

But we are not talking about creating, there is 100% no doubt tha Kirby created either wholly or in part a lage portion of the MU. But that doesn't mean he owns them or by extension his kids or grandchildren own them.

 

[dupont2005]

I dont understand why the heirs get anything at all, they didn't create bull squat.

 

But we are not talking about creating

 

Apparently we are.

You don't understand why the heirs get anything since they didn't create anything. I don't understand why some suits or some people who had a broker make a purchase of shares for them online get anything for the same exact reason.

 

 

The answer is, it's more complicated than that. Why would Disney settle if they had a bulletproof case? Maybe those million dollar lawyers thought the case wasn't all that bulletproof. If they lost the Kirby case, what would the implications be in a Liefeld and McFarlane case? Not good.

[topofthetotem]

If I hire an artist to paint a picture of my dog, and that artist then becomes world renowned and his paintings start selling for millions does his kids and grand kids have a right to my dogs painting?

 

Because to settle with the family is the smart business descision for a company that is adverse to bad press. They have possibly tens of billions of dollars worth of properties that they own and a few mil that they give the family is change in the sofa.

[01TheDude]

If I hire an artist to paint a picture of my dog, and that artist then becomes world renowned and his paintings start selling for millions does his kids and grand kids have a right to my dogs painting?

 

Because to settle with the family is the smart business descision for a company that is adverse to bad press. They have possibly tens of billions of dollars worth of properties that they own and a few mil that they give the family is change in the sofa.

 

this

 

even if Disney wins the legal case, they end up losing in public perception. For what it would cost to litigate this case until the end, they settle early for the same amount without making it seem like they are greedy. They are greedy-- by nature00 this is a business. But to give that minor amount of money (in the overall scheme of things) to the heirs i a quicker, simpler, and less toxic method. It is almost a penny-wise, pound foolish situation.

[dupont2005]

If I hire an artist to paint a picture of my dog, and that artist then becomes world renowned and his paintings start selling for millions does his kids and grand kids have a right to my dogs painting?

 

Because to settle with the family is the smart business descision for a company that is adverse to bad press. They have possibly tens of billions of dollars worth of properties that they own and a few mil that they give the family is change in the sofa.

 

 

Once again, REGARDLESS, you said "I don't know why X thinks they should get any money, they didn't create anything."

 

That same exact logic could be applied to Disney executives and shareholders, who also create nothing.

[dupont2005]

Because to settle with the family is the smart business descision for a company that is adverse to bad press. They have possibly tens of billions of dollars worth of properties that they own and a few mil that they give the family is change in the sofa.

Then why did they wait until now, after all this publicity, to do it? It's been several years now, hasn't it?

 

And it's not like Disney never had any bad press before.

[mtlevy]

I'm just glad to think Jack can look down on all of this and feel his family is being taken care of due to what he created.

That's all he ever wanted.

 

Perfect Post!

[kav]

I dont understand why the heirs get anything at all, they didn't create bull squat.

 

True, though not to sound facetious, but isn't that the point of inheritance... to inherit any estate of value that was accumulated by others (esp. parents)? Same could be said for the kids of Warren Buffet or Mars Bars founders. While some might not see it as 'fair,' per se, it should be carried out equally for everyone.

I still don't know how you can inherite work for hire which it was.

Kirby got a raw deal sure enough but he was paid for his services.

and if most of his original art wasn't stolen, his family could have made a pretty penny selling it today. I think that would have pizzed me off more than anything else, the theft of all his art.

Do you mean the OA that was returned to him was stolen or are you referring to the art that wasn't returned to him? In the Kirby Collector there's an article about the tens of thousands of pages of OA Kirby had stacked in the back room that had been returned to him. That's million$$$ right there.

As far as people not getting what they deserve man the guys who clean septic tanks deserve a hell of a lot more but what're ya gonna do?

[Unca Ben]

Do you mean the OA that was returned to him was stolen or are you referring to the art that wasn't returned to him? In the Kirby Collector there's an article about the tens of thousands of pages of OA Kirby had stacked in the back room that had been returned to him. That's million$$$ right there.

As far as people not getting what they deserve man the guys who clean septic tanks deserve a hell of a lot more but what're ya gonna do?

 

No. Kirby did not receive tens of thousands of pages back from Marvel.

Kirby got a few thousand (about 2 thousand?) pages back, if I remember correctly. I'm too lazy to look it up.

[kav]

Well in the Kirby collector he describes several 5 foot high stacks-thats tens of thousands. A foot high stack of comic boards is about 1300 pages

[kav]

Even were it 2000 pages those pages go for 5-10000 sometimes 50,000 so thats 10-20 mil right there

[Prince Namor]

If I hire an artist to paint a picture of my dog, and that artist then becomes world renowned and his paintings start selling for millions does his kids and grand kids have a right to my dogs painting?

 

Not the same thing. Not even close to the same thing.

 

Because to settle with the family is the smart business descision for a company that is adverse to bad press.

 

So after 30+ years of 'bad press', they make that decision now to save face? There's more to it than that.

 

They have possibly tens of billions of dollars worth of properties that they own and a few mil that they give the family is change in the sofa.

 

Absolutely.

 

 

[Unca Ben]

Not when they were returned to him - about 1900 pages I think.

 

I talked with one dealer who bought art from Jack when it was returned to him and he was saying some pages went for $50 -$100 at the time. Maybe more for better pages, but don't think Jack got 10K to 50K a page when he sold them.He didn't. This guy took out a loan against his house to buy up as much he could.

 

You're thinking today's prices - art has gone up in price quite a bit since those times.

[Unca Ben]

The above post was a reply to Kav.

[kav]

Well 1900 pages is just over a foot high stack and doesn't jibe with what the author said he saw in the Kirby Collector article. But you're right the pages were way cheaper back then.

[Unca Ben]

It's fairly common knowledge how many pages Jack got back- someone will chime in, I think.

[Prince Namor]

Even were it 2000 pages those pages go for 5-10000 sometimes 50,000 so thats 10-20 mil right there

 

Not back in the 80's it wasn't.

[Unca Ben]

Well 1900 pages is just over a foot high stack and doesn't jibe with what the author said he saw in the Kirby Collector article. But you're right the pages were way cheaper back then.

 

I found it- here (he was originally offered 88 pages)

 

"The final resolution came in May of 1987, nearly three years after Marvel had first begun returning original art backstock and nearly 30 years after it had begun accumulating the art. Marvel had dropped its demand that Kirby sign the four-page document and had amended the short form to address his concerns. Details of the amendments were not made public, but Kirby’s lawyer, Greg Victoroff, told the Journal, “Jack got just about everything he wanted.” The form was signed and the art was returned. The eventual tally of Kirby art Marvel had collected for return came to approximately 1,900 pages, still far short of his total output for Marvel but considerably more than the amount originally specified."