Marvel Could Lose Rights For Iron Man, The Hulk, Thor and The Avengers
Recently the heirs of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel won a trial against DC Comics, thereby regaining some control of the legendary comic book character. In the light of that success the heirs of Jack Kirby — one of the most accomplished comic book creators of all time — has sued Marvel over the rights for all of the characters he spawned at the comics giant. Helping them do that is the same firm that helped the Siegel heirs win their trial. I smell a new fad within the comic book world coming.
Over the span of his career, Kirby took part in creating both Iron Man, Thor, the original X-Men, The Fantastic Four, The Hulk, Silver Surfer and Black Panther among others. So if the outcome of the trial ends up being roughly the same as the Superman deal then Marvel will be in a lot of trouble and Disney even more so. People are already saying that the house of mouse may have struck a poor deal acquiring Marvel for the sum that they did since several of Marvel’s franchises are already leased out elsewhere (like X-Men being at Fox). If the remaining ones were also possibly snatched away, then the purchase starts to feel more or less redundant.
The case seems like a quick cash grab from the Kirby heirs’ side, so I doubt that this will go as far as the Superman case and Marvel will just try to strike a quick deal with them. Still, even if it should go to court and Marvel were to lose, I doubt that the Kirby heirs would pull the plug on any potential projects for the future when they could just accept a piece of the cake on every production instead. What do you think, is a new fad starting, and could this mean the fall of comic book movies for good?
Comments (13)
Kirby is a legend.
However – seems like there was a time, not too long ago, when a contract was binding… Neither you, nor your family after you passed away could sue the other party because 30 years leter it turned out you may have made a bad deal and missed out on some money. Nothing like sticking it to the big guy, huh?
Hooray for litgious underachievers!
I can’t tell if this picture is of a bunch of gay dudes holding hands who are annoyed that Wasp wants to join the “boys club”, or macho men who briefly joined hands in a completely non-homosexual way for a quick pep talk only to be distracted by Wasps luscious ass as she flies away…
Posted by Shut-Up Ed on September 21st, 2009I hardly think this could affect comic book movies at all. The Kirby clan would only make more money if they won.
Their lawsuit is also a little different than the Siegel one.
Also, Stan Lee had as much to do with creating those characters as Jack Kirby did and he’s not complaining. I think he’s going to be a big factor in this.
Posted by Greg on September 21st, 2009Stan Lee isn’t complaining because he gets a cameo in every Marvel movie
Maybe that’s all the Kirby clan really wants…
Posted by Shut-Up Ed on September 21st, 2009Funny, Stan was the publishers nephew, he was and is management, so I don’t think he has a gripe about how he is treated, especially after he sued to get a bigger piece of the movie pie.
Posted by Duke Togo on September 21st, 2009Kirby drew /created the first 100 issues of the Fantastic Four. They are still really fun to read. The first appearances of Galactus, Silver Surfer, Black Panther, The Inhumans, on and on……..
Posted by Kamandi on September 21st, 2009What Hollywood did in those two FF movies was complete crap. Who allowed them to be made$?
Daredevil, Hulk (Ugh), Wolverine, X-Men 3 Crap.
How about no more movies and read a couple of hundred issues of great Jack Kirby comics.
And would everyones idea of a lawsuit be different if Kirby was still alive?
Stan Lee is a hack…and a thief. ‘Nuff said, true believers!
Posted by Fatbologna on September 22nd, 2009This could get ugly, but will do little in the big picture to harm the unstoppable wheel that is the comic-book-movie genre. I’m just glad this hasn’t happened to Batman, which is the only comic-book movie franchise I can really say I care deeply about.
Posted by Snake Eyes on September 22nd, 2009Kirby worked for a company just like any other worker and has no ownership over the characters, that was the deal then and is so now. The company owns the characters and he was an employer.
Does an architect demand money if somebody sells the house he drew?
The Superman deal is different because they created the character first, then went to a publisher.
Posted by swarez on September 22nd, 2009Thor’s a pussy,leave him out of the Adengers!
Posted by Machete on September 22nd, 2009marvel sux period. that’s all i’m going to say
Posted by Rick on September 22nd, 2009this feels like pro wrestling to me. they’re jumping leagues!
Posted by Ledgewood on September 22nd, 2009swarez
this is actually exactly like the example you cited. Kirby was an integral part of creating many of those characters…on the other hand, his greedy family wasn’t.
Posted by fatbologna on September 22nd, 2009i must say dc is USELESS.marvel is 11111111 times better then dc. just keep things as they are. i enjoy marvel so they should just keep it the same.
here are is wish.
marvel buys rights to superman and batmen.
boo dc!
Posted by jake on September 23rd, 2009Leave a Reply