Must admit all aspects of Kirby heirs V Marvel always baffle.

First.... I can't understand how anybody can credibly argue that Marvel didn't have a valid work for hire contract with Jack K. Is there any new legal rule that says that contracts become invalid because something becomes a massive success??

But... equally... I'll never understand why decision makers at Marvel (especially "dear old Uncle Stan") could not find it in their hearts to treat Jack much more generously. Not.. because of compelling legal reasons... but just out of gratitude for what the guy did for them.

I think their first argument would be that at the time Kirby created the disputed characters, he didn't have any written contract with Marvel, valid or invalid.

Exactly, I'd like to think most people could agree on that at least.

He built and or co-built nearly the entire foundation of Marvel. There had to be a better way. Maybe someday some new suit will have wondered as much and decide that Marvel will take a little of that movie money and give out grants or scholarships in Kirby's name. Donate a ton of money to the Kirby museum, or erect a big bronze statue somewhere. Something.

At one point did Stan Lee stop writing comics for Marvel and just got paid to be a promoter?

Jack Kirby with Stan Lee created the Hulk, Fantastic Four, Thor etc., but it was Stan Lee who created Marvel Comics. Obviously not the company itself but that thing that made Marvel what Marvel was* - the spirit of Marvel so to speak; the ridiculous nicknames, the over-top dialogue and titles, the pomposity, that indefinable thing that made Marvel Marvel and not DC. Of course, he had the characters, he had Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko and other great artists/creators but Stan drove it all. He has promoted Marvel for the last 50 years relentlessly, he's done thousands of interviews, hundreds of conventions. Without Stan pushing and pushing, would Marvel have survived? Is having great creators and great comics enough?

*Marvel Comics no longer has that thing that they had when I was a kid. Just another comics company but the Avengers Movie had that thing, now that was a 60s Marvel Comic come to life.

No one is trying to take anything away from Lee. He's due all the respect in the world. Like Kirby he created and/or co-created the foundations of Marvel comics. He created the brand, but not without the product to back it up. These men where a perfect storm of cartoony greatness, take Stan or Jack out of the equation and there is no telling if it could have been as good.

The media treats Stan Lee like the "Walt Disney" of comics, often giving him credit for inventing the comic book. He's extremely wealthy, his wife and daughter have not only benefited from that wealth, they are contractually due millions as well. (according to Lawson if I remember correctly). He even gets movie money, and cameo's.

So stop worrying about Mr. Lee. He got his. And continues to get his, and even his family will benefit from his work. Compare that to the vast amounts of money and media attention Jack Kirby and the Kirby family gets.

Nice post. You made me want to start reading the 60s Marvel Comics. It was like being part of an exclusive club back then compared to the less personal DC?

So his popular writing just naturally progressed him into his later position? I guess I can see why he got to be in that position. Marvel didn't just ask him to be the face of the company. But I would have thought they'd give Jack Kirby a job as art director or something.