Next HA Auction ! 4 4

[delekkerste]

I've done well with the right borises and julies.

 

I prefer the term "Borii".

[Bronty]

I've done well with the right borises and julies.

 

I prefer the term "Borii".

 

[Bronty]

I've done well with the right borises and julies.

 

I prefer the term "Borii".

 

However, for it to be "Borii" the spelling would have to be Borus

[otherworldsj33]

Makes me wonder how long the family actually had this on their mind. It seems they initiated it not long after they got the settlement money.

I also am curious as to who their lawyer is. How they came across him.

BTW, there are not many people who make money for their family after they are dead. Kirby, provider and gentlemen he was, glad to see he was financially able to aid his loved ones from the grave. If he could have seen this day in the flesh.

Despite that I think his family are either ill advised or greedy, or both.

Once again proves that ideas and values instilled live on long after the life span of the propagator.

[Brian Peck]

The Kirby lawyer is Marc Toberoff, the ambulance chasing lawyer of entertainment. He is a very sleezy guy. He was the one who sued DC/WB on behalf of Siegel family.

[SquareChaos]

I find it interesting to see the level of animosity towards the Kirby family here. I mean, as best I can determine following this thread, no one here really seems very aware of the plan, or even if there is a plan.

 

If your own father or grandfather had been fleeced (as it is widely considered now a days - comics will break your heart, kid) by big business, you might look around and see what you could do to even the score. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just a little surprised at some of the adjectives being tossed around.

[Brian Peck]

I find it interesting to see the level of animosity towards the Kirby family here. I mean, as best I can determine following this thread, no one here really seems very aware of the plan, or even if there is a plan.

 

If your own father or grandfather had been fleeced (as it is widely considered now a days - comics will break your heart, kid) by big business, you might look around and see what you could do to even the score. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just a little surprised at some of the adjectives being tossed around.

 

 

The family just got a s h i t load of money and now they want to go after original art that has been out there for at least 30 years (when some of the art was returned to Jack). They now have the money to throw at lawyers to lean on sellers and auction houses. I bet Marc Toberoff is behind this.

Edited December 30, 2016 by Brian Peck

[SquareChaos]

I find it interesting to see the level of animosity towards the Kirby family here. I mean, as best I can determine following this thread, no one here really seems very aware of the plan, or even if there is a plan.

 

If your own father or grandfather had been fleeced (as it is widely considered now a days - comics will break your heart, kid) by big business, you might look around and see what you could do to even the score. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just a little surprised at some of the adjectives being tossed around.

 

 

The family just got a s h i t load of money and now they want to go after original art that has been out there for at least 30 years (when some of the art was returned to Jack). They now have the money to throw at lawyers to lean on sellers and auction houses. I bet Marc Toberoff is behind this.

 

Again, I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying. People seem to have come out throwing rocks, judging that the family has 'gotten enough' and should be done with it all. Who are we to say? This track doesn't look like one I'd personally go down were I in their shoes, but I also don't know the whole story or what their end aims are.

[otherworldsj33]

I can't see how there can't be at least some negative feelings toward the family in this. Now that we know the lawyer is a s...bag, it puts the family in a even more negative light.

The family has a good name. Kirby (and his wife) are remembered by knowledgeable fans as much for their kindness and love as for his art. Personally, to me, that is more important then his art. His kids, and/or grand kids, and/or nieces or nephews, are tarnishing that name.

What do you need to know more then what is already going on? As Sandy Alderson said, at best it's bad optics. It's not going to get better. It can only stay at this public relations nightmare level or get worse.

 

 

[Bronty]

I find it interesting to see the level of animosity towards the Kirby family here. I mean, as best I can determine following this thread, no one here really seems very aware of the plan, or even if there is a plan.

 

If your own father or grandfather had been fleeced (as it is widely considered now a days - comics will break your heart, kid) by big business, you might look around and see what you could do to even the score. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just a little surprised at some of the adjectives being tossed around.

 

Except that he wasn't fleeced by big business - he was paid fairly at the time, same as any of the rest of us, or any of the other marvel workers.

 

Marvel profited from Jack's creations, sure, and they paid not only him but hundreds of other people to keep that operation going and viable and fans engaged with it all. Each person associated with marvel's efforts from the office staff to the people churning out marvel cartoons in the 60s and 70s, to the marvel movies of the last 15 years, and all the comics and other projects in between have all contributed to the enduring fame and success of the characters in some way. Without all of those lunchboxes and cartoons, subsequent storylines, action figures, the movies never get made. Without the movies they aren't as big today. Its a giant snowball that a whole host of people have managed to push downhill for 50 years and its gotten bigger and bigger and bigger. Yes Jack smushed his hands around that first bit of snow and gave it its first big push down the hill but I think comics fans sometimes seem to give all the credit to the creator and none to the other people that made all the success and money possible. Without marvel being a well run ship, FF and spidey might go under after a relatively short run and what do you have then? Abandoned, mostly worthless IP.

 

So if Jack is entitled to anything beyond his paycheck then what about the cartoon makes, movie makers, the receptionist?? Why shouldn't their efforts towards success count for something. He was a paid contractor and he did his work well so he got lots more paid work as a reward.

 

That's really the end of the story, or would be if it weren't for how fantastically successful its all become at which point the amount paid no longer starts to look fair compared to the amount reaped. But at the time he did the work he was fairly paid, therefore, not fleeced! Lots of people have made lots of inventions while being paid by someone else that they didn't get rights to either.

 

As to adjectives, although I have made sure not to use any absolutes personally since I don't know the story, when you have people with a presumably 8 figure settlement and almost certainly no proof of what was or wasn't stolen, given away, sold etc., chasing after a piece of joe public's wallet (whether directly or through heritage, who would presumably pass on the charge), yeah joe public is not going to like it!

 

They may seem like the underdogs when suing disney, but with a big settlement in their back pocket, they are very much no longer the underdogs when hassling Joe Public. Fact is they really don't have any rights to hassle Disney either, but for Disney it was worth it to pay them to go away. Joe Public just wants them to go away!

 

 

 

[otherworldsj33]

I find it interesting to see the level of animosity towards the Kirby family here. I mean, as best I can determine following this thread, no one here really seems very aware of the plan, or even if there is a plan.

 

If your own father or grandfather had been fleeced (as it is widely considered now a days - comics will break your heart, kid) by big business, you might look around and see what you could do to even the score. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just a little surprised at some of the adjectives being tossed around.

 

 

The family just got a s h i t load of money and now they want to go after original art that has been out there for at least 30 years (when some of the art was returned to Jack). They now have the money to throw at lawyers to lean on sellers and auction houses. I bet Marc Toberoff is behind this.

 

Again, I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying. People seem to have come out throwing rocks, judging that the family has 'gotten enough' and should be done with it all. Who are we to say? This track doesn't look like one I'd personally go down were I in their shoes, but I also don't know the whole story or what their end aims are.

 

You and your family couldn't live on 40 or 50 million?

As much as comic art has escalated, I doubt there are very many people in our hobby who are worth even close to that. Even most of the more fortunate collectors have collections worth probably less then 5 million, way less in most cases.

Have some grace, and let it go. The time is past.

It smacks of a legal shake down and pure greed to almost all of us.

In this matter, it makes Adams look good, which is hard to do.

[SquareChaos]

I find it interesting to see the level of animosity towards the Kirby family here. I mean, as best I can determine following this thread, no one here really seems very aware of the plan, or even if there is a plan.

 

If your own father or grandfather had been fleeced (as it is widely considered now a days - comics will break your heart, kid) by big business, you might look around and see what you could do to even the score. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just a little surprised at some of the adjectives being tossed around.

 

Except that he wasn't fleeced by big business - he was paid fairly at the time, same as any of the rest of us, or any of the other marvel workers.

 

Marvel profited from Jack's creations, sure, and they paid not only him but hundreds of other people to keep that operation going and viable and fans engaged with it all. Each person associated with marvel's efforts from the office staff to the people churning out marvel cartoons in the 60s and 70s, to the marvel movies of the last 15 years, and all the comics and other projects in between have all contributed to the enduring fame and success of the characters in some way. Without all of those lunchboxes and cartoons, subsequent storylines, action figures, the movies never get made. Without the movies they aren't as big today. Its a giant snowball that a whole host of people have managed to push downhill for 50 years and its gotten bigger and bigger and bigger. Yes Jack smushed his hands around that first bit of snow and gave it its first big push down the hill but I think comics fans sometimes seem to give all the credit to the creator and none to the other people that made all the success and money possible. Without marvel being a well run ship, FF and spidey might go under after a relatively short run and what do you have then? Abandoned, mostly worthless IP.

 

So if Jack is entitled to anything beyond his paycheck then what about the cartoon makes, movie makers, the receptionist?? Why shouldn't their efforts towards success count for something. He was a paid contractor and he did his work well so he got lots more paid work as a reward.

 

That's really the end of the story, or would be if it weren't for how fantastically successful its all become at which point the amount paid no longer starts to look fair compared to the amount reaped. But at the time he did the work he was fairly paid, therefore, not fleeced! Lots of people have made lots of inventions while being paid by someone else that they didn't get rights to either.

 

As to adjectives, although I have made sure not to use any absolutes personally since I don't know the story, when you have people with a presumably 8 figure settlement and no proof of what was or wasn't stolen chasing after a piece of joe public's wallet (whether directly or through heritage, who would presumably pass on the charge), yeah joe public is not going to like it!

 

They may seem like the underdogs when suing disney, but with a big settlement in their back pocket, they are very much no longer the underdogs when hassling Joe Public.

 

 

 

I generally agree with you on most of the major points you make with regards to a person being compensated to do a particular job... and I don't want to get in to the IP / creators / company ownership type arguments as that is / was a matter handled by the courts and not what I was referring to.

 

I was simply referring to how, as we all know, the artists were often on the outside looking in with regards to their early pages. Some good, right things happened along those lines over the decades, but a lot of people feel like it never went far enough.

[Bronty]

In this matter, it makes Adams look good, which is hard to do.

 

Yes!

 

I find the idea of the artists having a perpetual percentage of resale to be utterly offensive.

 

If your home builder wanted 10% of the price of the home every time it changed hands, what would you say to them?

 

Property rights belong to the owner period. If the artist wants to participate in his or her own market, simply keep your originals and STFU!

[SquareChaos]

I find it interesting to see the level of animosity towards the Kirby family here. I mean, as best I can determine following this thread, no one here really seems very aware of the plan, or even if there is a plan.

 

If your own father or grandfather had been fleeced (as it is widely considered now a days - comics will break your heart, kid) by big business, you might look around and see what you could do to even the score. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just a little surprised at some of the adjectives being tossed around.

 

 

The family just got a s h i t load of money and now they want to go after original art that has been out there for at least 30 years (when some of the art was returned to Jack). They now have the money to throw at lawyers to lean on sellers and auction houses. I bet Marc Toberoff is behind this.

 

Again, I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying. People seem to have come out throwing rocks, judging that the family has 'gotten enough' and should be done with it all. Who are we to say? This track doesn't look like one I'd personally go down were I in their shoes, but I also don't know the whole story or what their end aims are.

 

You and your family couldn't live on 40 or 50 million?

As much as comic art has escalated, I doubt there are very many people in our hobby who are worth even close to that. Even most of the more fortunate collectors have collections worth probably less then 5 million, way less in most cases.

Have some grace, and let it go. The time is past.

It smacks of a legal shake down and pure greed to almost all of us.

In this matter, it makes Adams look good, which is hard to do.

 

Again, I'm not looking for an argument - I'm just stating my surprise at the language being used when no one really even knows what is happening.

 

As best I can tell, all of this stems from gossip and one email from an auction house at the moment. Time will open this up and the facts will come out, then people can draw actual conclusions.

[SquareChaos]

In this matter, it makes Adams look good, which is hard to do.

 

Yes!

 

I find the idea of the artists having a perpetual percentage of resale to be utterly offensive.

 

If your home builder wanted 10% of the price of the home every time it changed hands, what would you say to them?

 

Property rights belong to the owner period. If the artist wants to participate in his or her own market, simply keep your originals.

 

You can't have the money from selling them and participate in their future market too!

 

I'd be shocked if we could find a lot of people that thought this was a good idea.

[Bronty]

I find it interesting to see the level of animosity towards the Kirby family here. I mean, as best I can determine following this thread, no one here really seems very aware of the plan, or even if there is a plan.

 

If your own father or grandfather had been fleeced (as it is widely considered now a days - comics will break your heart, kid) by big business, you might look around and see what you could do to even the score. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just a little surprised at some of the adjectives being tossed around.

 

 

The family just got a s h i t load of money and now they want to go after original art that has been out there for at least 30 years (when some of the art was returned to Jack). They now have the money to throw at lawyers to lean on sellers and auction houses. I bet Marc Toberoff is behind this.

 

Again, I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying. People seem to have come out throwing rocks, judging that the family has 'gotten enough' and should be done with it all. Who are we to say? This track doesn't look like one I'd personally go down were I in their shoes, but I also don't know the whole story or what their end aims are.

 

You and your family couldn't live on 40 or 50 million?

As much as comic art has escalated, I doubt there are very many people in our hobby who are worth even close to that. Even most of the more fortunate collectors have collections worth probably less then 5 million, way less in most cases.

Have some grace, and let it go. The time is past.

It smacks of a legal shake down and pure greed to almost all of us.

In this matter, it makes Adams look good, which is hard to do.

 

Again, I'm not looking for an argument - I'm just stating my surprise at the language being used when no one really even knows what is happening.

 

As best I can tell, all of this stems from gossip and one email from an auction house at the moment. Time will open this up and the facts will come out, then people can draw actual conclusions.

 

I think when there is more than enough there to have a discussion about. Those appear to be real emails, and real art pulled from the public eye. There's more than enough to start conversation.

[SquareChaos]

I find it interesting to see the level of animosity towards the Kirby family here. I mean, as best I can determine following this thread, no one here really seems very aware of the plan, or even if there is a plan.

 

If your own father or grandfather had been fleeced (as it is widely considered now a days - comics will break your heart, kid) by big business, you might look around and see what you could do to even the score. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just a little surprised at some of the adjectives being tossed around.

 

 

The family just got a s h i t load of money and now they want to go after original art that has been out there for at least 30 years (when some of the art was returned to Jack). They now have the money to throw at lawyers to lean on sellers and auction houses. I bet Marc Toberoff is behind this.

 

Again, I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying. People seem to have come out throwing rocks, judging that the family has 'gotten enough' and should be done with it all. Who are we to say? This track doesn't look like one I'd personally go down were I in their shoes, but I also don't know the whole story or what their end aims are.

 

You and your family couldn't live on 40 or 50 million?

As much as comic art has escalated, I doubt there are very many people in our hobby who are worth even close to that. Even most of the more fortunate collectors have collections worth probably less then 5 million, way less in most cases.

Have some grace, and let it go. The time is past.

It smacks of a legal shake down and pure greed to almost all of us.

In this matter, it makes Adams look good, which is hard to do.

 

Again, I'm not looking for an argument - I'm just stating my surprise at the language being used when no one really even knows what is happening.

 

As best I can tell, all of this stems from gossip and one email from an auction house at the moment. Time will open this up and the facts will come out, then people can draw actual conclusions.

 

I think when there is more than enough there to have a discussion about. Those appear to be real emails, and real art pulled from the public eye. There's more than enough to start conversation.

 

Yes, true, I should have been more clear. I mean, this is a message board! I'm not sure why I used that term.

 

To try to correct myself - I think it's too early for the pitchforks and torches

[Bronty]

In this matter, it makes Adams look good, which is hard to do.

 

Yes!

 

I find the idea of the artists having a perpetual percentage of resale to be utterly offensive.

 

If your home builder wanted 10% of the price of the home every time it changed hands, what would you say to them?

 

Property rights belong to the owner period. If the artist wants to participate in his or her own market, simply keep your originals.

 

You can't have the money from selling them and participate in their future market too!

 

I'd be shocked if we could find a lot of people that thought this was a good idea.

 

Depends on how you define a lot I suppose. I'm sure lots of artists think free money is a good idea even when not deserved. But yeah anyone unbiased will look at it for the crock of BS that it is. It pizzes me off that it is even talked about though. I guess I shouldn't be giving the issue any attention then.

[otherworldsj33]

All they are doing is driving the art underground. They know that. How is that good for them or anyone else?

And at the price of (my guess) most collectors having hard feelings toward them. Maybe more boos for them then applause at the next cons they attend, assuming they decide to go after this sheet show.

[Brian Peck]

In this matter, it makes Adams look good, which is hard to do.

 

Yes!

 

I find the idea of the artists having a perpetual percentage of resale to be utterly offensive.

 

If your home builder wanted 10% of the price of the home every time it changed hands, what would you say to them?

 

Property rights belong to the owner period. If the artist wants to participate in his or her own market, simply keep your originals.

 

You can't have the money from selling them and participate in their future market too!

 

I'd be shocked if we could find a lot of people that thought this was a good idea.

 

Except for some artists who's art has increased in value alot since it was originally produced.