Well, all them MGM cartoons of Barney Bear were owned by Ted Turner who is now under the Time-Warner umbrella...and the comic books were copyrighted by MGM in the first place. So I can't imagine why Time-Warner wouldn't own those rights, even if no division there is aware of them. (The folks at Sony only recently figured out that they own the old Columbia FOX & CROW cartoons and are about to re-release them. Three years ago, you could have called every Sony office between here and Japan and not found anyone who knew about them.)

The only possible glitch in the above logic is that Mr. Barks was paid by Western Publishing Company, and it is possible that there does not exist in the MGM/Time-Warner files one scrap of paper that proves that they, the owners of Barney Bear, have the right to reprint those particular comics. The Time-Warner barristers almost certainly have no proof that Barks signed away his rights and may not even have any of the paperwork between MGM and Western.

Even if they wanted to sell someone the right to reprint those comics (which they may not; see above messages), they could well be afraid of making such a license, then finding out that Barks and/or Western had some ongoing financial interest or claim on the material.

Kim --
Given the current state of copyright law, what's the deal with stuff like Barney Bear going into the public domain? These days, it seems like a commercial property owned by a big corporation doesn't EVER do that anymore.

Quack, Don

------------------
GRAPHIC NOVEL REVIEW FOR LIBRARIES
P.O. Box 55148
Phoenix, AZ 85078

Not that it counts in any major way, but Sugar & Spike appeared in a few Ambush Bug comics.

Of course, a) Giffen is DC's super-exception to creator control rules: he was allowed to use Gaiman's Death in both AB and LOSH... b) he had Julie Schwartz on his team... c) it might count as parody and therefore have been oaky with Mayer (who was still alive then, unless I'm confused and shouldn't be posting at 1am).

Mute said:
>>Sugar & Spike appeared in a few Ambush Bug comics.<<

They also appeared in a Wonder Woman being babysat by Byrne's new Wonder Girl and as teens on a Legionnaires cover.

>>Giffen is DC's super-exception to creator control rules: he was allowed to use Gaiman's Death in both AB and LOSH...<<

The LSH use of Death (issue #38, right?) was negotiated with Mr. Gaiman, and a second version was eliminated from the comic.


------------------
Johanna
johannadc@mindspring.com
www.mindspring.com/~johannadc

Apologies to all who downloaded this entire thread for this:

Yeah, the Death appearance in AB was approved by Gaiman, too; he even edited her dialogue. I should have said something about the creators in question respecting Giffen's intentions or something, but it was 1am.

Now it's 4.50 am. I do sleep sometimes, though.

Forgive my dragging films into this, but if Barney the Bear is relevent, the following sure is.

Case in point on creative divisions of rights: Reportedly, NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD screenwriter John Russo and director George Romero agreed each could go their seperate ways with sequels.

George, of course, ultimately graced screens with the groundbreaking DAWN OF THE DEAD and the undernourished but solid DAY OF THE DEAD, which sadly fell far short of Romero's planned conclusion to the trilogy (I've read the script -- it was a real conclusion, and would have been among the best horror films ever made, no doubt about it). George done good, all in all.

Russo's rights led to a pallid novel, RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD, which in turn led to a lively parody film "adaptation" (no relation to the novel) RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD. Later this year, Anchor Bay is releasing Russo's "revised" version of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (done in collaboration with others who'd had a hand in the original film), sporting newly-filmed footage, cuts (to accomodate the new footage, apparently), and a new rock score. Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, for all the wrong reasons.

Nevertheless, this is indicative of what can come of creative partners abiding by their decisions, and living with the consequences.

Just an observation.

And another:

Mr. Barry Buchanan wrote:

"I have got to give props to both of these guys for the shear fact that, if I
date them right, many of the early Blueberry's pre-date S. Leone's grim westerns. An act I think we
can all agree on that changed what westerns where to be like or should be like."

As one of the few here who apparently does love westerns, I had the opportunity to once raise the question about Sergio Leone directly to Jean Giraud (over dinner together in Boston about eight years ago). Jean dismissed Leone completely, stating his preference for the westerns directed by Anthony Mann (including many collaborations with actor James Stewart, and the Gary Cooper classic MAN OF THE WEST, among others). That led to a fairly lively conversation about the Mann westerns -- he's among my favorite American filmmakers -- and Jean emphasizing the impact the Mann westerns had on BLUEBERRY.

(PS: By the way, John Cusack's upcoming video release of THE JACK BULL is worth a look -- best western since UNFORGIVEN, and very reminescent in theme and specifics of the best Mann westerns of the late 1950s.)