Support Ghost Rider Creator Gary Friedrich

[Brazoo]

Yeah - that was Bono as a congressman involved in making that law - not acting as a singer/songwriter - just in case there's any confusion about that.

It's also know as the "Mickey Mouse Protection Act" because Disney Corp. was one of the biggest lobbyers for the law.

[Brazoo]

I take exception to the explanation that it's impossible for Marvel to offer some kind of bonus for an ex-employee who was responsible for co-creating a work that's going to earn millions of dollars in revenue (for a second time). It's not impossible for companies to do this - particularly when PR is involved.

It's not even an issue of ownership - they could offer payment as a creative consultant or something. There are probably a handful of people getting thousands of dollars for this movie that won't even end up with any contributions in the final product - they can't toss a few bucks to the guys who helped create the thing?

[Earth 2 Chris]

DC gave substantial monies to Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams upon the release of Batman Begins, due to their creation of Ra's Al Ghul. Both came out and said it was a nice gesture, and something DC didn't have to do. Even Adams, who fought hard and long to get Siegel and Shuster SOME compensation and credit for Superman. DC then gave Jerry Robinson a salaried position before DKR came out, due to his contribution to the Joker's creation.

Marvel COULD do the same thing, and probably they should. It would go along way to helping their image. But then, Marvel was the last company to start returning artists artwork too, and drug Jack Kirby's legal woes out for decades over the matter.

Chris

[madmarva]

www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=37017

In an interview with CBR published Wednesday, Quesada and Buckley clarified some misinformation about the judgment in the suits between the company and Friedrich concerning Ghost Rider. The link is above.

* Friedrich can promote himself as one of the creators of Ghost Rider.

* The $17,000 judgment against Friedrich was not something Marvel pursued but rather an outcome of court deciding against Friedrich in the case. It wasn't a punitive judgment but a remunerative one. Since Marvel had the rights to the character, the court ruled he needed to pay Marvel the amount he grossed on selling material using the company's character.

* Buckley said the outcome of the suit does not change Marvel's stance on convention sketches.

Buckley: "We in no way want to interfere with creators at conventions who are providing a positive Marvel experience for our fans. We want fans to speak and interact with the creators who wrote, penciled, inked, lettered, colored or edited their favorite stories. Part of that positive interaction is that a fan can walk away with a signed memento or personalized sketch from an artist."

Now, none of this helps Friedrich. Based on the decision, he still owes Marvel $17,000 as an outcome of him suing Marvel. I think it's a kind and noble gesture for anyone who has the means or inclination to donate to his cause.

But, just because this judgment came down against Friedrich doesn't mean Marvel is on a witch hunt against creators who are selling sketches at Cons. Just like it has been for 40 years, artists selling sketches of Marvel characters at cons is fantastic PR and advertising for the Marvel brand at a relatively low cost.

However, I'm sure the judgment will put a chilling effect on creators filing suits for rights to characters they created or co-created under work-for-hire contracts.

And, it still sucks that over the years creators have not gotten a better share of the profits their creations or co-creations generated.

[Earth 2 Chris]

Oddly enough, beginning in the 80s, DC started giving creators participation profits on characters they created. Marv Wolfman and George Perez benefitted from the Teen Titans cartoon. Chuck Dixon bought a house with the money he get from "Batman and Robin" (I know, he told me and a table full of friends personally).

I find this odd, because in the past 30 years, creators have seemed less and less inclined to give their best creations to DC and Marvel, even though now they WILL get something out of it if a movie, TV series or toy is made. They want the Image deal though. All or nothing. Just kind of ironic.

Chris

[samurainoir]

DC gave substantial monies to Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams upon the release of Batman Begins, due to their creation of Ra's Al Ghul. Both came out and said it was a nice gesture, and something DC didn't have to do. Even Adams, who fought hard and long to get Siegel and Shuster SOME compensation and credit for Superman. DC then gave Jerry Robinson a salaried position before DKR came out, due to his contribution to the Joker's creation.

Marvel COULD do the same thing, and probably they should. It would go along way to helping their image. But then, Marvel was the last company to start returning artists artwork too, and drug Jack Kirby's legal woes out for decades over the matter.

Chris

And given that many of Marvel's current a-list talent are being rewarded with consulting and design gigs on these movies, it shouldn't be such a big deal to go back and give the actual creators similar gigs... Even if you look at it from a purely PR stance within the comic book community. (unless it's Alan Moore, I don't think any other creator would turn down $$ coming their way so unexpectedly).