Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 109
  1. #46
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Falz View Post
    I would have never done that.
    Sure. Hindsight thirty years later is a difficult thing to argue against no matter how absurd and disingenuous the argument it upholds. Hypothetically, should you ever create something like Watchmen after signing a contract with DC, rest assured that DC/WB lawyers will find a new loophole to screw you over to get all the money. That's what happens. They'll find a new loophole just for you because of the special little unicorn you are.

    If his creations were THAT important to him, he could have taken the contract to a contract attorney to have them look it over for him and warn him of what could happen, if he didn't.
    Again. He did that, and everything seemed fine on the surface. Nobody could have predicted or anticipated DC to kneecap him in the specific way they did. This is basically you declaring against the actual record and evidence that Moore was some idiot.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinsir View Post
    Alan Moore has pretty much denounced most of his superhero work anyway. I'm actually a Alan Moore megafan because I've followed his wishes and have pretty much never read any of his work (including Watchmen). Anyone else a true Alan Moore fan like me?
    Well the good news for you is that a substantial chunk of Moore's output isn't superhero work at all. If Moore never wrote superheroes he would still be valued as a great writer in comics for stuff like:
    -- The Ballad of Halo Jones
    -- V for Vendetta
    -- Brought to Light
    -- A Small Killing
    -- From Hell
    -- Lost Girls
    -- Promethea
    -- The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
    -- Necronomicon
    -- Providence
    -- Big Numbers
    -- Also a bunch of classic short comics for smaller publications such as "The Bowing Machine" and "Pictopia" among others.

    The fact is that the majority of Moore's career has been in independent comics unaffiliated with the Big Two, most of it outside the superhero genre. The time he worked for DC that was basically a five year stretch of his career. That's it from around 1983-1987 or so.
    Last edited by Revolutionary_Jack; 10-16-2020 at 11:11 AM.

  2. #47
    Extraordinary Member Zero Hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    7,716

    Default

    The problem with creator writes is who should really get credit for making the character popular? Lets look at Deadpool. Can any of you really look me in the eye and say Rob Liefeld is the reason the character is so popular? No. It was latter writers that came in and played with the character adding to their mythos that really made the character a fan favorite. Almost every comic book character that has been written by more than 1 writer and been around a for while has this situation. It gets tricky especially with golden age characters because lets be honest most of the real character depth didn't really come until the Silver Age or latter with most Golden Age stories being fairly simple.

  3. #48
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zero Hunter View Post
    The problem with creator writes is who should really get credit for making the character popular? Lets look at Deadpool. Can any of you really look me in the eye and say Rob Liefeld is the reason the character is so popular? No. It was latter writers that came in and played with the character adding to their mythos that really made the character a fan favorite. Almost every comic book character that has been written by more than 1 writer and been around a for while has this situation. It gets tricky especially with golden age characters because lets be honest most of the real character depth didn't really come until the Silver Age or latter with most Golden Age stories being fairly simple.
    That's quite a separate issue from Alan Moore and WATCHMEN.

    In Watchmen's case it's clear cut. These are original characters in original situations with original stories and original visual designs all made and decided by the team of Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons.

    Alan Moore isn't asking for rights to Swamp Thing or Superman or The Joker -- licensed characters who he redefined and influenced. He also said that he didn't want rights to John Constantine (a character he co-created with John Totleben that has become a DC mainstay) because the contracts he worked on them was clear-cut work-for-hire* agreed on by all parties beforehand.

    Watchmen was supposed to be different.


    * I actually do think writers should get royalties and support even for work-for-hire gigs. Ironically, and hypocritically, Tom King articulated something similar when he said that Batman is arguably the creation of O'Neill, Miller, Neal Adams as much as Finger and Kane because their additions to the mythos significantly transformed and altered the conception of the characters.
    Last edited by Revolutionary_Jack; 10-16-2020 at 11:25 AM.

  4. #49
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Motavia
    Posts
    115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Sure. Hindsight thirty years later is a difficult thing to argue against no matter how absurd and disingenuous the argument it upholds. Hypothetically, should you ever create something like Watchmen after signing a contract with DC, rest assured that DC/WB lawyers will find a new loophole to screw you over to get all the money. That's what happens. They'll find a new loophole just for you because of the special little unicorn you are.
    I don't doubt that they may try something like that, which is why if, hypothetically, I created something like Watchmen, I would most likely never publish it with DC Comics, a company that specializes in hoarding IPs, and I would most certainly, positively, POSITIVELY never sign the rights of the creation over to ANYONE, EVEN FOR A SECOND. That's called being careful. By the time Moore did Watchmen, DC's situation with Siegal and Shuster was known, as was the Kirby situation with Marvel, so it's not like it was some secret that comics publishers weren't always particular generous to the creators.

    Again. He did that, and everything seemed fine on the surface. Nobody could have predicted or anticipated DC to kneecap him in the specific way they did. This is basically you declaring against the actual record and evidence that Moore was some idiot.
    Moore is a man. He is not a god or supernatural being. Men make poor decisions all the time. He made the decision to sign his creations over to DC Comics, even though, apparently he wants his creations for himself. That was a poor decision on his part. Would I call him an idiot? Well, I never said he was. What I say he wasn't as careful as he could have been? Sure.

  5. #50
    Savior of the Universe Flash Gordon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    9,021

    Default

    Thank you thank you! I 100% agree with this. It's not always the big bad corporation. They made a deal, signed contracts. Just because DC followed their contracts and the creators didn't think their creations wouldn't become so successful doesn't mean DC is wrong.
    It's always " the big bad corporation". Have some common decency and stand with your fellow human beings.

    It's not OK to punch down.
    Last edited by Flash Gordon; 10-16-2020 at 11:38 AM.

  6. #51
    Incredible Member Hol's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    988

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash Gordon View Post
    It's always " the big bad corporation". Have some common decency and stand with your fellow human beings.

    It's not OK to punch down.
    I don't think disagreeing about what transpired or who is wrong and who is right regarding comic book rights means I have no common decency. I am also not always going to side with one side because they are people and the other side is a corporation. I will side with the side I believe is right or within their rights.

    Corporations employee people. These peoples lives can be effected by the outcome of these matters so I will not blanket my support behind any side.

  7. #52
    Savior of the Universe Flash Gordon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    9,021

    Default

    Nevermind

    (10 charas)

  8. #53
    Incredible Member Hol's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    988

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash Gordon View Post
    Nevermind

    (10 charas)

    Same here.
    Last edited by Hol; 10-16-2020 at 11:49 AM.

  9. #54
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Falz View Post
    I don't doubt that they may try something like that, which is why if, hypothetically, I created something like Watchmen, I would most likely never publish it with DC Comics, a company that specializes in hoarding IPs, and I would most certainly, positively, POSITIVELY never sign the rights of the creation over to ANYONE, EVEN FOR A SECOND.
    And that's good. That's why Image Comics which gives rights to creators full and final exists. But again part of the reason for Image and the rise in graphic novel and creator owned work is because of what happened to Moore and Watchmen.

    After that, creatives simply gave up the hope of reforming Marvel and DC from the inside.

    By the time Moore did Watchmen, DC's situation with Siegal and Shuster was known, as was the Kirby situation with Marvel, so it's not like it was some secret that comics publishers weren't always particular generous to the creators.
    Well you actually hit the nail on the head. The 80s was a time of the creator's rights movement, where the way writers and artists were treated by the Big Two came to public attention and was a major debate among fans. In response to this Marvel and DC actually took steps to reform. EIC Jim Shooter at Marvel started an entire royalties system for the first time for Marvel writers and artists and he returned Jack Kirby's art back to him. DC/WB also signed a new deal with Siegel-Shuster and its estate after the Christopher Reeve movie brought attention to Superman and made it a public scandal about how the American icon's creators were exploited (literary figures like Norman Mailer and other celebs of the time took up the cause). Attacking someone for expecting better and fair treatment after seeing evidence of some change and then getting betrayed doesn't make the victim some moron, it makes the people who did the treachery scumbags. As Machiavelli said, "It cannot be called virtue to...betray one’s friends, be without faith, without pity...by these methods one may indeed gain power, but not glory."

    So when Moore signed the contract with Watchmen he did have reason to believe that things had changed and a fair expectation that DC would treat him honorably. DC then stabbed him in the back proving that they had learned nothing, and that they would never change. And later artists at Marvel -- Jim Lee, Macfarlane and others -- decided to form Image when they realized that Marvel too would never change despite the improvements made by then (especially since Shooter the guy who was behind that was removed and fired by then).

  10. #55
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Motavia
    Posts
    115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    So when Moore signed the contract with Watchmen he did have reason to believe that things had changed and a fair expectation that DC would treat him honorably. DC then stabbed him in the back proving that they had learned nothing, and that they would never change. And later artists at Marvel -- Jim Lee, Macfarlane and others -- decided to form Image when they realized that Marvel too would never change e the improvements made by then (especially since Shooter the guy who was behind that was removed and fired by then).
    Yes, I'm already aware of this element of comics history.
    Just to see if I'm understanding you correctly, though, are you saying I'm "attacking" Alan Moore?

    Nowhere have I said the man is a "moron" or "idiot". You literally put those words in my mouth.

  11. #56
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Falz View Post
    Yes, I'm already aware of this element of comics history.
    Just to see if I'm understanding you correctly, though, are you saying I'm "attacking" Alan Moore?

    Nowhere have I said the man is a "moron" or "idiot". You literally put those words in my mouth.
    It essentially comes to the same thing. If you say that Moore should have been smarter about the contract and so on and so forth, you imply in these posts:

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Falz View Post
    I think that if you're a creator working with/for a publishing company, and you want to own the rights of what you create, be careful of what you sign, and don't take people at their word alone. Do that, and you should be pretty okay. If someone is in blatant breach of the contract, you should have a pretty good case against them, so you would hopefully not have too much trouble finding a lawyer to take it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Falz View Post
    No, he was not careful, or at least not careful enough, I'm afraid. He signed over his creations to DC Comics. If he didn't want to do that, he should have never done that. I would have never done that.

    It doesn't matter what he expected to happen, what matters is what was in the contract. As far as the law is concerned, it's really as simple as that. If his creations were THAT important to him, he could have taken the contract to a contract attorney to have them look it over for him and warn him of what could happen, if he didn't.
    You imply that he didn't take precautions, that he didn't know what a contract was, that he was a rube and so on. That he didn't in fact talk to lawyers at that time or later. This operates on the assumption that "if I do <X> then they can't do <Y>" and that because <Y> happened to Moore, he didn't do <X>. That's not what happened and not what it works.

    It basically amounts to a kind of smugness i.e. "It can't happen to me" or "It can't happen to anyone who takes measures". And underneath that assumption is this attitude that being smart means you can't be betrayed or screwed over. Betraying and screwing people over isn't cleverness or shrewdness, it's being an a--hole.

    I am simply deconstructing a mentality I see active here and elsewhere whenever the issue of Moore and Watchmen come up, especially a new group of fans who want to bash Moore and so on. You may not be aware of this, or intend it, but it's what I gather from your posts.

  12. #57
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Motavia
    Posts
    115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    It essentially comes to the same thing. If you say that Moore should have been smarter about the contract and so on and so forth, you imply in these posts:





    You imply that he didn't take precautions, that he didn't know what a contract was, that he was a rube and so on. That he didn't in fact talk to lawyers at that time or later. This operates on the assumption that "if I do <X> then they can't do I am simply deconstructing a mentality I see active here and elsewhere whenever the issue of Moore and Watchmen come up, especially a new group of fans who want to bash Moore and so on. You may not be aware of this, or intend it, but it's what I gather from your posts.
    a) No, it CAN happen to me, which is why I'm especially cautious so that it doesn't.

    b) People can only betray you if you get in bed with them to begin with.

    c) If you're getting in bed with someone, know who you're getting in bed with and what they're about and capable of.

    d) I didn't imply anything about him not taking precautions. I said he could have taken the contract to an attorney, IF HE DIDN'T. Do you read?

    e) Don't sign the rights of your creations away if you want to keep the rights. Pretty simple. This logic applies to 2020, 1930s, and 1980s.

    f) You're being overly emotional about this if you think I attacked Alan Moore by saying creators should be careful about what they sign.

  13. #58
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Motavia
    Posts
    115

    Default

    There's another thing to consider, too. The fact that Moore originally wanted to use the Charlton characters for his story kind of suggests he may not have even given much of a crap about rights until after the story was a smash success, because had things gone the way he wanted, he certainly wouldn't have had the rights.

  14. #59
    Extraordinary Member superduperman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Metropolis USA
    Posts
    7,210

    Default

    Not necessarily. I think there's a difference between changing your mind and having a double standard. He's clearly still bitter about the whole Watchmen thing, and I get it. And he's refused any royalties from any adaptations of his work which has got to be hard to turn down so you know he's committed. If he had the chance to do it over again knowing what he knows now would he still go into comics? IDK. Probably not. It's not like he's out there praising his 1980s work while he's saying all these things. Some people just get bitter as they get older. Mostly from bad experiences, which Moore has had his share of. Better this than become some bigot who spews conspiracies. There are worse ways to turn out.
    Assassinate Putin!

  15. #60
    Extraordinary Member Lightning Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zelena View Post
    I think that to be realistic in a adult world, the superheroes should be ready to give up all their fancy stuff, all the things that could be tied to “childish superheroes” or be ready that people “in-universe” make fun of them.
    But why? Why can't the concept just be stretched a thousand different ways for the sake of creativity?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •