General Category > Comic Related Discussion
Jack Kirby's copyrights and Steve Ditko's departure from Marvel Comics
Yoc:
Funny you should ask B... ;)
[shameless plug]
Fox Features and Victor Fox will be the focus in the May 2011 issue of AlterEgo #101.
See here for a link - http://tinyurl.com/4vnlu3c
Their double size issue 100 (called Centennial) is going on sale any minute.
http://tinyurl.com/4hcvhhq
They are offering 15% off on the site and you can buy digital editions for $5.95.
I consider it THE source for monthly GA scholarship.
[/shameless plug]
And in an even bigger plug...
[shameless plug]
Victor Fox and Eisner will be a big part of the future PHANTOM LADY ARCHIVES V2 - The FOX Years
The second of a planned three volume set covering the entire career of PL from her Quality beginnings (v1 now on DCM at the bottom of the Quality section CLICK HERE!), her Fox years (v2) and her post Fox days at Ajax, AC and DC Comics (v3).
Stay tuned for more info on PL Archives V2 in the future...
[/shameless plug]
Ain't I 'shameless'? ;D ::)
Bob Hughes:
Boy some of you buy into the company store mentality without as much as an eye blink. Fact: Kirby had contracts with almost every publisher he ever worked with up until the late 50's. Therefore his expectations were not to be treated as "slave labor", a field hand, or a migrant worker. Second we're talking about contract law and copyrights here. The "expectations" were that none of these characters were going to last long enough to bother with renewals. Artists "sold" their work for a period of 28 years. Until that 28 years was up and things came up for renewal there was no expectation of what would happen next. Joe Simon got all his copyrights back. Siegel and Shuster didn't. The courts eventually ruled that copyrights remained with the purchaser for the renewal period- but there was no "expectation" that that would happen because it had never been done before.
All copyrights were supposed to run out after 56 years. Then Congress extended the law and returned the copyrights to the original creators. Congress did it. The law says it. Marvel and DC have no case. The slaves have been freed. The Emancipation Proclamation was signed. End of story. Now, if Goodman had been smart enough to get Kirby to sign a work for hire contract it would be a different story. But since he can't prove it was work for hire, it wasn't. Burden of proof is on Marvel.
josemas:
--- Quote from: Bob Hughes on March 24, 2011, 04:10:43 AM ---Boy some of you buy into the company store mentality without as much as an eye blink. Fact: Kirby had contracts with almost every publisher he ever worked with up until the late 50's. Therefore his expectations were not to be treated as "slave labor", a field hand, or a migrant worker. Second we're talking about contract law and copyrights here. The "expectations" were that none of these characters were going to last long enough to bother with renewals. Artists "sold" their work for a period of 28 years. Until that 28 years was up and things came up for renewal there was no expectation of what would happen next. Joe Simon got all his copyrights back. Siegel and Shuster didn't. The courts eventually ruled that copyrights remained with the purchaser for the renewal period- but there was no "expectation" that that would happen because it had never been done before.
All copyrights were supposed to run out after 56 years. Then Congress extended the law and returned the copyrights to the original creators. Congress did it. The law says it. Marvel and DC have no case. The slaves have been freed. The Emancipation Proclamation was signed. End of story. Now, if Goodman had been smart enough to get Kirby to sign a work for hire contract it would be a different story. But since he can't prove it was work for hire, it wasn't. Burden of proof is on Marvel.
--- End quote ---
Bob,
While I've read quite a bit about copyright regarding films over the years I'm still learning about it as regards comics (and periodicals in general). While there are similarities I know there are differences too.
Are there any good sites you'd recommend that would address this. I'm especially interested in any that address the ways in which a creator, such as Joe Simon, was able to regain copyrights to his material.
Thanks
Joe
John C:
Joe, the formal term is Termination Right of Transfer of Copyright (informally, and stupidly misleadingly, "Copyright Termination"), I believe, and this is a decent overview. I can't find a solid bit for writers, though, only musicians, so double-check any numbers with the Copyright Office.
http://www.aimp.org/copyrightCorner/2/Termination_Rights_-_Explained
And no, Bob, I haven't "bought in" to any mentality. Kirby ran his own company. It didn't survive and he went back to Atlas. He worked independently. Nobody knows about those projects. Conclusion: Marvel had more than a little to do with his success.
Now, I agree with you that copyrights have been stretched all out of proportion, but where we differ is that I don't think that Kirby's family deserves the extended rights more than Disney (Marvel's current parent) does, just because Disney is a faceless corporation. Neither of them do, but Marvel invested more over a longer period then some relatives of the artist did, surely.
Yoc:
Here's an entry on CBR on the very subject with depositions sited.
http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=31268
Happy reading
-Yoc
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version