Marvel sues Spider-Man, Hulk artist heirs for rights

The heirs don't really have a case since it was a collaborative effort due to what was called "The Marvel Method"

When Marvel Comics became popular and expanded in the early-1960s Marvel's editor and chief writer, Stan Lee, needed to write several titles a month. So he gradually began to provide his primary artists, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko, only with the essential beginning, middle and end of a story. Lee did that often in person or via telephone.

The artist would then plot and pace the specific scenes, often adding secondary characters, and turn in the penciled pages, often with margin notes to help Lee follow the action. After approving the artwork and having either the artist or the production staff make any mandated editorial changes, Lee would then add dialog, captions and sound effects.

It's hard to claim title to it when Kirby wasn't the sole author of the works especially for those that weren't even involve in creating any of it.

Hulk Mad!

Hulk angry at Marvel. Marvel try to sue Hulk creator heirs!

Hulk creator like father to Hulk!!! Hulk creator heirs like Hulk siblings!!!

AAaaarrghhh!!!

Corporations amass so much power because of these ideas . In the past , they were needed to distribute and promote . Now that can be done by artists and their fans . They will not be fair to the family , because they are grasping at the last bits of power they can . Copyright laws have been altered quite to their favor . Mickey mouse should be public domain too , but look at how Disney has teams of lawyers hunting for people to sue . They have become fat leaches off artist work . Maybe the family wishes to use the same model , but the best they could do is to have a museum of sorts to the artist , with what pieces they were left . Will marvel even allow that ? They could sue .

Stan Lee was always the writing brain behind all these Marvel characters. Kirby, et al, drew to order. In fact, in the case of Spiderman, the artist was Steve Ditko for years. Regardless of changes in the law, I don't see where the family has a prayer in this one. This isn't like Siegel/Shuster/Superman. Those guys invented the character and brought him to the publishers. And even then, proper acknowledgment was only brought about because Warner/DC thought it was the "right" thing to do.

@nocturnus9----looks to ME the way things are trying to be leveraged. DISNEY IS NOT GOOD FOR ARTISTS.

I guess this is one instance where fighting to keep Mickey Mouse out of the public domain for so long means creators can expect to have no rights to their creative work above the corporation.

I think that the owner of an idea is whomever has the idea in the first place. And to keep the artists name alive, their relatives deserve some compensation when that idea is continuing to be used.

Many artists thrive because of their corporate financial backing. Without it, ideas - great ideas - would never have seen the light of day.

So, why not work out a partnership. An understanding of each others role and an equal say in the ideas reproduction.

Because that's what this is all about. The reproduction and distribution of an idea.

No one can really own an idea - when it morphs, changes, divides, and matures - but they can at least split the gains when its being reproduced.

I think the family is being selfish, or maybe not. Maybe they asked nicely for a compromise, or maybe Marvel asked for some type of settlement. I think credit for these ideas should go to the family, and to Marvel, but sometimes money makes us forget what's fair.

That said, I think it would be awesome if art of any kind was free to the public after the artist died! Absolutely anyone can recreate it, distort it, and rework it, however they please! And that work (being based on the first idea) is free as well!

Basically anyone and everyone can do what ever the fuck they want with a dead artists idea, and that extends to the manipulation and reproduction of the idea!

Fuck yeah! :)

.............really,.....a lot of that stuff -should- go "public domain" relatively soon,.............but WAY to much F-n money is involved in Hollywood. Damn,....doing "Tarzan" is still a mess. Edgar Rice Burroughs has been DEAD DEAD DEAD ,..........how long?

@viva_canuks

MARVEL may win this,....but times have changed,.....and it is not the fault of his surviving clan that the man had the poor grace to be mortal,..........( as opposed to corporate "DISNEY" )

I guess the issue really is that the two sides have conflicting stories of how Jack Kirby was hired. I am hoping that if Marvel is pursuing this, they have the evidence to prove that their story is the factual one.

Jack Kirby's estate is claiming: "Kirby worked with Marvel out of his own house as a free-lancer with no employment contract, no financial or other security, nor any other indicia of employment. ... Kirby's wonderful creations, which leapt from the page, were not Marvel's 'assignments,' but were instead authored by Kirby under his own steam and then published by Marvel." (statement released by Kirby's estate on Friday)

Marvel is claiming that the work was "for hire".

According to copyright laws, if Jack Kirby's work is deemed "work made for hire," the copyright would belong to Marvel.

The relationship between the artist and the corporate machine, AS INTERPRETED BY LAW, has changed in the last 35 or so years. We will just have to see how this pans out.

how about sharing copyright? Of course Marvel would see this as a loss. Kirby made Marvel what it is, and i am sure props werent given. Disney and Marvel were made for each other

I'm more for Marvel with this one.
Kind of sounds like the whole J.R Tolkin family copyrights issues. I.E, the family wants their money and thats it. Greedy bastards.

figures. the evil mouse at work again. soon there will be jonas brothers crossovers and xmen with abstinence rings. AAAGH . way to ruin everything mickey.

Kirby was an amazing artist. He was the absolute genesis of all that comic book art is and shall forever be.

That being said, he was hired by Stan Lee (on a purely book-to-book basis) to draw what Stan, himself described.

When Stan invited Jack on to Marvel full time, Jack turned him down, quoting "I'm done with those characters, I've moved on."

The family has no right.

I hope the family wins. I'm not sure what the copyright laws were like when he created those things, but these days it is NOT as simple as "e was employed by them at the time of creating these characters and he created them for Marvel". The exact nature of the relationship and employment contract is very important to the case. Was he a full time employee? Was he a free lancer? Was it work under some sort of temporary contract? What was the nature of the contract?

with out marvel these characters would be nothing , marvel is the machIne that put these characters on the map .

copyright laws are so mindless. If the man never even owned the works how exactly do his heirs? Even if he had owned them, the rights should expire with his death. There has been just enough of talentless heirs collecting on old ideas, let the madness stop.

I rarely do this, but I have to side with Marvel on this one. He was employed by them at the time of creating these characters and he created them for Marvel... that would make it property of Marvel, not his Heirs...