The Future of the MCU - Phase Four

[Steel Inquisitor]

Yes but OG Dracula was copyright infringement, So they had to change him to something original

I guess I will tie this back into topic by saying this will probably be the guy we see in Blade in Phase Four if they decide to show Dracula

How was Marvel OG Dracula copyright infringement? I hope not, I want to see real Marvel Dracula.

[Midvillian1322]

I never said other studios payed Universal, I said Universal let them use the characters

They let them? If they really had the film rights to any version of Dracula they wouldn't just let people use them. They probably just have the rights to a very specific version of Dracula. He's public domain so if they all film rights to any version of dracula id like to know how they pulled that off?

[Killerbee911]

They let them? If they really had the film rights to any version of Dracula they wouldn't just let people use them. They probably just have the rights to a very specific version of Dracula. He's public domain so if they all film rights to any version of dracula id like to know how they pulled that off?

Yup they owns the rights to THIS version on Dracula below and probably title rights to movie name "Dracula" everyone has to add something to it like of "Curse of Dracula" "Bram Stokers Dracula"


They can't do anything about this Dracula



or this Dracula



I don't know why people are having such hard with this concept just like with Sherlock Holmes and Thor, They can't stop using the character if you do original take that doesn't infringe popular version own by specific people. For example this happened

https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/25/2...t-infringement

Conan Doyle estate is trying to sue Netflix because Enola Doyle is showing "warmth and affection" and that is key traits to their version Sherlock Holmes.

Also found this

Written in 1897, Bram Stoker’s original Dracula novel has long since passed into the public domain. If it were up to Universal though, the character would remain under their ownership. The studio even attempted to purchase exclusive rights to the iconic vampire, featuring him heavily in their horror films in the 1930s and ’40s. That all fell apart when it was revealed that Stoker himself hadn’t complied with U.S. copyright law for the original trademark, firmly placing Dracula in the public domain once and for all.

[Derek Metaltron]

And yet BBC’s Dracula is pretty faithful to the classic/Universal design.

p07y2ljg.jpg

[Killerbee911]

And yet BBC’s Dracula is pretty faithful to the classic/Universal design.

It is and isn't at same time. The small of details things do matter in this stuff.

[Midvillian1322]

Yup they owns the rights to THIS version on Dracula below and probably title rights to movie name "Dracula" everyone has to add something to it like of "Curse of Dracula" "Bram Stokers Dracula"


They can't do anything about this Dracula



or this Dracula



I don't know why people are having such hard with this concept just like with Sherlock Holmes and Thor, They can't stop using the character if you do original take that doesn't infringe popular version own by specific people. For example this happened

https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/25/2...t-infringement

Conan Doyle estate is trying to sue Netflix because Enola Doyle is showing "warmth and affection" and that is key traits to their version Sherlock Holmes.

Also found this

Yes this makes way more sense. Marvels Dracula as he is now is nothing like the universal version.

[Frobisher]

I get that Feige wanted to hurt Perlmutter but Inhumans has good characters in it. Are they persona non grata as a property forever because of his grudge with Perlmutter?

I'd say they're unfortunately at the back of the queue behind every mutant ever now thanks to that nonsense, with only their Fantastic Four adjacency as some hope of a soft reboot ignoring the TV series.

[Midvillian1322]

I'd say they're unfortunately at the back of the queue behind every mutant ever now thanks to that nonsense, with only their Fantastic Four adjacency as some hope of a soft reboot ignoring the TV series.

If they play up the F4 as explorer's in the MCU. I can see Namor and Atlantis taking up a movie, as well as Attilan and the Inhumans. Other then that yea I don't know. The real answers will come with Ms Marvel. If they make Kamala an Inhuman there is hope. If they change her background to make her a Mutant or just "Enhanced" then kiss Black Bolt goodbye

[luprki]

You can't own the rights to a public domain character. Anybody can use Dracula. You could go out right now and make a Dracula movie and Universal couldn't do a thing about.

Look up the law, bro

[Holt]

Inhumans are in a hard spot with Eternals getting a movie and Marvel now having the X-Men back.

[Derek Metaltron]

Inhumans are in a hard spot with Eternals getting a movie and Marvel now having the X-Men back.

As I said Ms Marvel is really their last chance for returning now that AOS is finishing. But I suspect that Kamala’s origins in the MCU will be changed to suit Carol’s.

[Alan2099]

Look up the law, bro

You might want to take your own advice.

Public domain means that no exclusive intellectual property rights apply.

Universal owns it's own distinct version of Dracula. It doesn't own the character, the story, or the appearance.
In an interesting twist, it's doesn't even completely own the appearance of it's own Dracula as it has to license Bela Lugosi's likeness from it's estate.

As for why Marvel changed it's Dracula, it seems far more likely they were trying to update the character to make him look less silly to a modern audience than anything to do with rights, as movies comics, cartoons, and the like continue to be made with a classic Dracula (and no involvement from Universal at all.) Personally though, I never got marvel's stance on that. If you want the name recognition and reputation behind Dracula, making him not look like Dracula seems to defeat the purpose.

And I'm not your "bro".

[luprki]

You might want to take your own advice.

Public domain means that no exclusive intellectual property rights apply.

Universal owns it's own distinct version of Dracula. It doesn't own the character, the story, or the appearance.
In an interesting twist, it's doesn't even completely own the appearance of it's own Dracula as it has to license Bela Lugosi's likeness from it's estate.

As for why Marvel changed it's Dracula, it seems far more likely they were trying to update the character to make him look less silly to a modern audience than anything to do with rights, as movies comics, cartoons, and the like continue to be made with a classic Dracula (and no involvement from Universal at all.) Personally though, I never got marvel's stance on that. If you want the name recognition and reputation behind Dracula, making him not look like Dracula seems to defeat the purpose.

And I'm not your "bro".

Again, look up the law, bro
Then comeback and admit you were wrong.

[Alan2099]

Again, look up the law, bro
Then comeback and admit you were wrong.

Are you really doing this?

"No U"

I have at least made some statements. You've just said, "look up the law." I will admit there are issues regarding trademarking and copyright and certain details can't be transferred over, but the character itself and the original story is public domain and has been for ages.

Do you not have the slightest clue what public domain means?

Also, I already asked you to stop calling me bro.
Stop.

[Vakanai]

Again, look up the law, bro
Then comeback and admit you were wrong.

No, he's not the wrong one here. You do not have to go through Universal to make a Dracula movie. There are some complicated rights and trademarks stuff to not do their specific Dracula, but you can do Dracula movies if you want no problem. Universal didn't allow Hotel Transylvania to be made, or Castlevania anime, or the BBC or Netflix films, or The Batman vs Dracula, or the Hellsing anime, or Blade Trinity, or Dracula 2000, or Bram Stoker's Dracula, or the Monster Squad, or Scooby Doo and the Reluctant Werewolf, or Billy the Kid Versus Dracula, or any of the other non-Universal Dracula movies I can't think of right now. Universal didn't give approval or ignore all these films and shows, they legitimately couldn't do anything about them.