Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Topic Options
#467625 - 06/05/01 09:31 PM Re: CREATORS RIGHTS
iusetobekb Offline
Member

Registered: 06/03/01
Posts: 282
Loc: hawaii
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ken Rothstein:
[B] Ok, How was Stan Lee taken advantage of? He spent all of last year hobknobbing with the Clintons and was described in newspapers as a millionaire (Gossip columnist Cindy Adams said he was a billionaire--go figure).

Bob Kane is someone else who doesn't seem to have been robbed all that much. No, he didn't become the 100% owner of a billion dollar franchise (to quote Entertainment Weekly), but he certanly was well compensated and stayed connected to Batman all the way until his death via one avenue or another.

two guys who got a % of what they were intitled to,they were stolen from,gil kane lived from paycheck to paycheck and he should'nt have had to.steve ditko,jack kirby,the life blood of this industry what did they get?
i see the pattern of thought you people have though,as long as we think there rich than fuck em,right?Gil kane,not rich steve ditko,marv wolvman,jack kirby,not rich.
Neil gaiman,he was doing comics during the most lucritve time for creators,he's rich,so let it go.These men deserve some respect.show some.

Top
#467626 - 06/05/01 09:44 PM Re: CREATORS RIGHTS
iusetobekb Offline
Member

Registered: 06/03/01
Posts: 282
Loc: hawaii
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ken Rothstein:


Creator's rights is something that gets lip service. On the one hand creators insist they want these rights, and then on the other they claim a desire "to play with someone else's toys" as reason enough to abdicate those rights and perpetuate a system they lament.




The men mentioned did'nt play with some one elses toys,they created them along with the room they play in.

Top
#467627 - 06/05/01 10:10 PM Re: CREATORS RIGHTS
brent Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 02/14/06
Posts: 11
Hey iusetobekb,

You forgot Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, who created the original. Nice of you to not mention them. Let's not forget they ended up near broke near the end. A court recently awared some kind of rights to Siegel's family. Let's see more traditions like this.

OH, don't forget Bob Finger, who was an important creator of many of the Batman mythos. Heck, even now people think of Bob Kane as the sole creator and that is truly sad.

Stan Lee got screwed? Gee, I guess making millions from your creations and a big ol' "Stan Lee Presents" at the top of every Marvel book, AND narrating characters for a Saturday morning tv show just isn't enough. Jack Kirby got screwed not once (Marvel), but twice (DC and the fourth world--which is a hell of a lot worse than what Marvel did to him.) I'll accept him in your list well before Stan the man.

What Marvel did to Marv Wolfman re: Nova is a complete disgrace, and what the courts said about it is worse. This character was made before Marv worked for Marvel. That is just a travesty.

Let's not forget Dan DeCarlo and Archie.

If you want to help these creators, send them money so they can sue for their rights. The time for talking to the corps is over.

Top
#467628 - 06/05/01 11:23 PM Re: CREATORS RIGHTS
Ken Rothstein Offline
Member

Registered: 04/03/00
Posts: 519
Loc: NY, NY USA
Quote:
Originally posted by iusetobekb:


two guys who got a % of what they were intitled to,they were stolen from,gil kane lived from paycheck to paycheck and he should'nt have had to.steve ditko,jack kirby,the life blood of this industry what did they get?
i see the pattern of thought you people have though,as long as we think there rich than fuck em,right?Gil kane,not rich steve ditko,marv wolvman,jack kirby,not rich.
Neil gaiman,he was doing comics during the most lucritve time for creators,he's rich,so let it go.These men deserve some respect.show some.


I think you misread me. I didn't say that these others got their share or more than their fair share, I said those two men specifically--Stan Lee especially--were not robbed.

Stan is a wealthy man. He is not entitled to 100% or even 50% of Spiderman or whatever because in every business venture the money man is entitled to a cut for being the one who took the risk in the first place. Stan was well compensated and is in no way struggling. The same with Bob Kane who had a deal with DC all the way up until 1968 and went on to be attached in some way to the Batman films in later years. He was not poor and Batman facilitated a comfortable life for him.

The others were not justly compensated in hindsight.

Top
#467629 - 06/06/01 12:23 AM Re: CREATORS RIGHTS
pureghetto Offline
Member

Registered: 06/04/01
Posts: 87
Stan Lee? what about Jim Lee? his artistic abilities outshine anything alive and thus he is entitled to all of marvel.

Top
#467630 - 06/06/01 01:13 AM Re: CREATORS RIGHTS
iusetobekb Offline
Member

Registered: 06/03/01
Posts: 282
Loc: hawaii
i left out alot of people.I wanted to see how quick you freaks would turn this into another excuse to bash todd,to your credit you did'nt,no,most of you just pissed on some of the most talented men in the history of popular culture.I'm impressed.

Top
#467631 - 06/06/01 01:53 AM Re: CREATORS RIGHTS
Leif Offline
Member

Registered: 06/05/01
Posts: 54
Loc: wa
Quote:
Originally posted by NatGertler:
[B] [QUOTE]I could be wrong here, and I dont know what direction to put you in to see if Im full of

Leif, trust me. I don't know who you are, but I don't think that there's a chance in a million that you know more about this stuff than Evanier. You may not know who he is: he is a comics writer with decades of experience, and a comics historian who has shown a special interest in the matter of creators rights.

If something you think you heard on the matter conflicts with something that Evanier is telling you in this matter, you can assume that you either misheard or are remembering incorrectly.

If I remember correctly I did say "I think" and "not sure" (not to mention "what direction to put you in to see if Im full of shit or not"). Im not disputing Mr Evanier's post at all. In fact I posted a question on another board to see if I could get a definitive answer. Since Mark has the answer, great! Thanks for the tip on his site, I'll check it out. And Mark thanks for the reply.
Dont worry Nat, Im not anyone important. Just want to learn more about the bis and get a chance to talk to folks in the know.

Top
#467632 - 06/06/01 04:22 AM Re: CREATORS RIGHTS
pureghetto Offline
Member

Registered: 06/04/01
Posts: 87
Quote:
Stan Lee? what about Jim Lee? his artistic abilities outshine anything alive and thus he is entitled to all of marvel.


whoever said that was a genius. As for creator rights, since all fictional characters become the property of whoever bought it, I hardly think that the creator (unless it is still the guy who owns it) has any rights whatsoever.

Ie: I rent a house and I change it into a mansion. I created the house, do I get to control it?

ok, bad example, here's another one

[This message has been edited by Pikachu (Edited 04-01-1999).]

Top
#467633 - 06/06/01 07:13 AM Re: CREATORS RIGHTS
brent Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 02/14/06
Posts: 11
pureghetto:
"As for creator rights, since all fictional characters become the property of whoever bought it, I hardly think that the creator (unless it is still the guy who owns it) has any rights whatsoever."

Really? Well, can you show us the contract that shows where DC bought Superman? Hey, how about that contract that Kirby signed re: the Marvel characters? Oh, yes, Marv Wolfman giving Nova over to Marvel? You got that one?

Dude, the point is those rights were never given, they were stolen! The creators lost out on millions of dollars because of greedy and near-illegal business practices. The only way they could have fought was in a court of law, but guess what? They had no money thanks to the same corps that screwed them in the first place. As I said before, if you want to help these people, send 'em money.

Top
#467634 - 06/06/01 09:49 AM Re: CREATORS RIGHTS
Kayo Offline
Member

Registered: 01/14/01
Posts: 177
Quote:
Originally posted by iusetobekb:
i left out alot of people.I wanted to see how quick you freaks would turn this into another excuse to bash todd,to your credit you did'nt,no,most of you just pissed on some of the most talented men in the history of popular culture.I'm impressed.


So this means that you don't really care about the rights of these creators and that you were just posting this as a way to provoke more Todd talk?

You really should feel ashamed of yourself.

Top
Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >