We all know that's not how it really works when it comes to Authorial intent and licensed properties owned by multimedia conglomerates is it? Particularly when by it's very nature, hundreds of thousands of people as work for hire hands create under the Authorial Identity of "Marvel Comics" and more recently "Marvel Entertainment", and in the future "Marvel-Disney".
Batman also carried a gun and went around shooting people. Seigel and Shuster wanted Superman to go around punching politicians.
"Marvel Comics" is the author on record of Spider-man, and Lee and Ditko really haven't had a say in the fate of Spiderman for four decades. Whether they object to Spider-Zombie or not, it comes part and parcel with signing away your rights by doing Work For Hire. Doesn't mean they shouldn't share in the profits of those $150 Spiderman statues though, in reflecting the kind of Royalty deals someone like Liefeld gets for Deadpool action figure and movie rights. Stan Lee has had his payday over the years (and even he had to sue Marvel to get it), but my understanding is Ditko washed his hands of Spiderman long ago and does not want a cent of the Spider-money ala Alan Moore and Watchmen.
Batman also carried a gun and went around shooting people. Seigel and Shuster wanted Superman to go around punching politicians.
"Marvel Comics" is the author on record of Spider-man, and Lee and Ditko really haven't had a say in the fate of Spiderman for four decades. Whether they object to Spider-Zombie or not, it comes part and parcel with signing away your rights by doing Work For Hire. Doesn't mean they shouldn't share in the profits of those $150 Spiderman statues though, in reflecting the kind of Royalty deals someone like Liefeld gets for Deadpool action figure and movie rights. Stan Lee has had his payday over the years (and even he had to sue Marvel to get it), but my understanding is Ditko washed his hands of Spiderman long ago and does not want a cent of the Spider-money ala Alan Moore and Watchmen.
Comment