Would You Want Marvel To Use A Public Domain Superman? Others?

[Kaitou D. Kid]

I'm almost certain that Marvel will use Superman in some form once he is public domain. Whether it's in a one-off like the Superman vs. The Amazing Spider-Man crossover or as an active superhero in the MU, I don't know. But I highly doubt they won't use him at all, especially when independent content creators start using him, and they definitely will.

If they do bring Superman (and eventually Batman) into the MU, a more interesting question is if they'll eventually bring in Metropolis and Gotham into the MU once those cities become public domain. Marvel for the longest time has marketed itself as "the world outside your window" and their characters have usually operated in real cities. Adding in two metropolitan cities the size of and identical to New York would change a lot of things in-universe. And on one hand Marvel will want to maintain their "world outside your window" marketing shtick, on the other hand Metropolis and Gotham are characters on their own and are too interesting & profitable for Marvel to just discard, especially Gotham which is its own profit-making brand name at this point. The same can't be said for DC's other fictional cities. Other cities at the very least aren't very iconic and profitable even if certain writers have done interesting things with them. So how those two cities joining the public domain will impact 616, that will be very interesting to see.

[Ascended]

I'd also be very interested in seeing how DC reacts to other publishers using the characters; does it force DC to invest more and push harder for higher quality content in order to keep up with the new competition, or does DC swerve in some way and replace Clark (and then Bruce, etc,) with characters they own outright? Might we see DC permanently replace Clark with Jon? Or Bruce with....well, any of his numerous sidekicks, partners, and legacies?

I wouldn't think DC would put such profitable characters on the shelf like that, but it's "Superman" who is profitable, not "Clark Kent," and this is the direction the company seemed to be leaning in a few years ago when the creators' heirs challenged DC's legal ownership of the Superman IP.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Disney is even more protective of their properties, and openly using Superman, even the stripped down pre-animation version, would open up a can of worms that they might not want to open.
Namely, Mickey Mouse and Captain America.

Mickey's first on the chopping block come 2024. If Disney fail to keep the rodent from entering PD in 2024 and the Steamboat Willie version of Mickey Mouse enters PD, then it's off to the races. Cartoons across the line will be free to feature Mickey, as will advertisements, and video games and so on. Indie games with a playable Mickey on Steamboat will hit the mobile market and so on and so forth. Adult Swim can do a crossover special Rick and Mickey. You can have the popular game Cuphead (a homage to classic cartoons) get a sequel with the actual black-and-white Mickey Mouse and Pete featured as characters.

If Mickey enters the PD then that would be the ballgame as far Action Comics #1 is concerned. If Mickey enters PD then AC#1 is gonna follow, no ifs and buts about it. And WB will host a Bugs Bunny and Mickey team-up cartoon series on HBO Max exploiting the 10 year advantage they hold before the Looney Tunes follow with PD. WB will be able to tap into PD versions of Mickey, Donald, Goofy by then. To be honest, Disney will be more worried about Donald Duck going into PD because globally speaking Donald brings in more money than Mickey does.

So either way we'll get an answer in the next 3 years. Either Mickey enters PD or the can gets kicked down. But again this year The Great Gatsby entered PD and it's expected more will follow, and from what I've gathered there's not much movement from lobbyists to insert copyright extensions, as of yet. They might do it later to avoid tipping their hand and they are probably plotting in secret as we speak. There's considerable populist anti-corporate and anti-IP and anti-Trust sentiment in the air. In the 90s, Pre-internet, Disney lawyers altered the law like thieves in the cover of darkness since the topic was too arcane and obscure sounding on paper at the time. Now it's different. Disney might prevail yet, but it will not be as easy as last time.

If they do bring Superman (and eventually Batman) into the MU, a more interesting question is if they'll eventually bring in Metropolis and Gotham into the MU once those cities become public domain. Marvel for the longest time has marketed itself as "the world outside your window" and their characters have usually operated in real cities. Adding in two metropolitan cities the size of and identical to New York would change a lot of things in-universe.

The thing about Gotham City is that the distinct gothic architecture and dark noir tones come later down the line. Arkham Asylum was introduced in 1970s. So if copyright law sends just the name Gotham City to PD but not all the visual paraphernalia that defines Gotham as Gotham, then it might be an issue. In either case, Marvel uses a lot of fictional countries -- Latveria, Wakanda, Attilan, Atlantis, Krakoa. So fictional US cities might be a bit more of a flex but not so much, and Gotham and Metropolis could be justified and explained as these cities that suddenly became big real soon real fast.

I'd also be very interested in seeing how DC reacts to other publishers using the characters; does it force DC to invest more and push harder for higher quality content in order to keep up with the new competition, or does DC swerve in some way and replace Clark (and then Bruce, etc,) with characters they own outright?

Characters entering public domain should encourage creators and companies to put out and invest in more original content. Corporate IP ownership and investment and hoarding on to them in time lead to a cycle of remakes, reboots, recycling and stagnation of genre and product. If WB sees Looney Tunes enter PD then they should start investing in the next bunch of creative cartoons and so on. Obviously animators and others know their worth more than they did but hey if you have to pay more to not exploit artists the message is not exploit artists. Disney unlike WB have animated characters across decades and not all of it dating to the Termite Terrace crew of the '40s and '50s so losing Mickey/Donald/Goofy to public domain won't be an issue for them since they've got Genie, Simba, Elsa, Woody, Buzz for a longer time.

The same applies to DC -- if Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman are entering PD soon -- well go out and create new and better superheroes. Put in the hard graft.

[Thor-Ul]

I don't think than Disney would permit to Marvel make use of Superman. Disney is the enterprise who has pushed more for keep certain IP ubnder their control and not let them fall in public domain. If they permit to Marvel do that would be stablish a legal preceding to other people to use also the IP from Marvel and Disney. And I don't think than the bosses of Disney would be happy with that.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I don't think than Disney would permit to Marvel make use of Superman. Disney is the enterprise who has pushed more for keep certain IP ubnder their control and not let them fall in public domain. If they permit to Marvel do that would be stablish a legal preceding to other people to use also the IP from Marvel and Disney. And I don't think than the bosses of Disney would be happy with that.

You've got it backwards. The situation is that Disney's IP (Mickey, Donald, Goofy) will enter PD before Superman does.

So the question is would WB and other companies not use Disney PD elements? In the case of superheroes, DC has a disadvantage over Marvel. Their biggest guns -- Superman, Batman -- will enter the PD long before Marvel's biggest characters enter PD. DC Comics stiill orbits around the Big Two introduced very early in their company's history, whereas Marvel doesn't really rely on their Golden Age creations to the same extent. In the late 1930s, DC had the biggest heroes, while Marvel had Namor, Captain America, the Burgos Human Torch. Valuable yes (Cap above all) but not lucrative. Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, the X-Men, the Avengers will enter in the 2050s, Wolverine in the 2060s, Claremont's X-Men additions in the 1970s, Venom, Carnage and Deadpool likewise later down the line. Miles Morales early 2100s. So Marvel has done the IP game as it should have done. DC's additions would be stuff like Vertigo, so Alan Moore's Swamp Thing, John Constantine, Watchmen, The Sandman will enter PD in 2070, and then they are more or less screwed unless they can launch into comics renaissance that brings in new IPs.

The moral is that if you don't invest and build on stuff and constantly encourage new ideas and creativity, you will not thrive for long. DC hasn't done as well as Marvel in a lot of respects in terms of building and expanding its comics. They got an edge in the '80s with Moore but then they burnt that bridge pretty thoroughly.

[Thor-Ul]

You've got it backwards. The situation is that Disney's IP (Mickey, Donald, Goofy) will enter PD before Superman does.

So the question is would WB and other companies not use Disney PD elements? In the case of superheroes, DC has a disadvantage over Marvel. Their biggest guns -- Superman, Batman -- will enter the PD long before Marvel's biggest characters enter PD. DC Comics stiill orbits around the Big Two introduced very early in their company's history, whereas Marvel doesn't really rely on their Golden Age creations to the same extent. In the late 1930s, DC had the biggest heroes, while Marvel had Namor, Captain America, the Burgos Human Torch. Valuable yes (Cap above all) but not lucrative. Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, the X-Men, the Avengers will enter in the 2050s, Wolverine in the 2060s, Claremont's X-Men additions in the 1970s, Venom, Carnage and Deadpool likewise later down the line. Miles Morales early 2100s. So Marvel has done the IP game as it should have done. DC's additions would be stuff like Vertigo, so Alan Moore's Swamp Thing, John Constantine, Watchmen, The Sandman will enter PD in 2070, and then they are more or less screwed unless they can launch into comics renaissance that brings in new IPs.

The moral is that if you don't invest and build on stuff and constantly encourage new ideas and creativity, you will not thrive for long. DC hasn't done as well as Marvel in a lot of respects in terms of building and expanding its comics. They got an edge in the '80s with Moore but then they burnt that bridge pretty thoroughly.

Oh, I understand. You got a point. But I think than Swampt hitn would enter PD before, he wasn't created by Moore.

Back on topic, I don't know if Marvel would do a good job with Superman. His track o managing other editorials superheroes has been not the best, in the past. I mean, I still am waiting for the new material of Miracle/MarvelMan.

[Ascended]

So the question is would WB and other companies not use Disney PD elements?

To answer that question, we need to look at the people in charge at WB/DC/AT&T. Assuming any of them are still around in a few years when this whole discussion becomes more than a hypothetical, anyway.

A year ago, when Dan Didio and all the other old guard comic guys (like Harras) were around, I'd have said that DC would respect Marvel's franchises even after they hit PD, and that Marvel would do the same for DC. As much as these two companies have ragged on each other and poked fun at each other, they largely employ a lot of the same people and operate fairly closely (classic oligopoly kind of setup).

But the people in charge of DC now? They're not comic book people, they come from other entertainment mediums like YA novels and tv or whatever (I forget exactly where) and I assume they have no "insider's club" mentality when it comes to comics. DC and Marvel likely would've had a gentleman's agreement under the old administrations, when both sides had worked with the other over many long years....but now? I don't know enough about the folks in charge to say. Maybe DC won't use the Mouse as a sign of good faith, to keep the balance and stop Marvel from using Clark and Bruce. Or maybe the folks at DC won't care that the Mouse is PD in the first place. Or maybe they'll take advantage of it, and then Marvel will do the same a few years later.

If that happens, then Marvel gains a lot more than DC does. DC will get access to Captain America, but Marvel will get Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Flash, Green Lantern, Robin....basically every major IP that DC controls will enter PD before 2040, while Marvel will still have sole ownership of their biggest guns for decades after that.

And if DC, who tend to sell below Marvel anyway, have to suddenly start competing against their own heroes on top of the Avengers and X-Men? I don't see it going well for DC.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

If that happens, then Marvel gains a lot more than DC does. DC will get access to Captain America, but Marvel will get Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Flash, Green Lantern, Robin....basically every major IP that DC controls will enter PD before 2040, while Marvel will still have sole ownership of their biggest guns for decades after that.

And if DC, who tend to sell below Marvel anyway, have to suddenly start competing against their own heroes on top of the Avengers and X-Men? I don't see it going well for DC.

Characters going into Public Domain at this point will be to Disney's overall benefit if you think about it.

WB's IP War-Chest in terms of merchandise rests on Harry Potter, LOTR, DC, Looney Tunes. Of the lot the latter two are supremely vulnerable in the near and immediate future. Harry Potter is safest, since it's author's life + 96 years so all WB have to do is make sure that Rowling gets the best treatment in the world and lives to be 120 or something and Harry Potter stays out of the public domain for a bicentennial. LOTR is hitting PD in 2050 (of course the side-effect is that WB can gain access to the Tolkien stories they don't have rights to and they own IP for their Shadow of Mordor adaptations so you can have a new LOTR adaptation with the full meat and bones). So WB's gonna have three of its pillars struck down and they need to invest heavily in new creators, new stories, new characters in the immediate future. With Disney, even if they lose Mickey/Donald/Goofy they have Simba, Elsa, Genie, Woody and Buzz for a long long time after that. The Looney Tunes have never really had strong defining successors and WB never transitioned to feature film animation the way Disney did.

I mean, I still am waiting for the new material of Miracle/MarvelMan.

Miracleman as an IP has its defining value that Moore and Gaiman took it all the way with the material. So it's not a traditional comic that can work as an ongoing by any means. It's completely different from AC#1 Superman.

[Mike_Murdock]

Mickey's first on the chopping block come 2024. If Disney fail to keep the rodent from entering PD in 2024 and the Steamboat Willie version of Mickey Mouse enters PD, then it's off to the races. Cartoons across the line will be free to feature Mickey, as will advertisements, and video games and so on. Indie games with a playable Mickey on Steamboat will hit the mobile market and so on and so forth. Adult Swim can do a crossover special Rick and Mickey. You can have the popular game Cuphead (a homage to classic cartoons) get a sequel with the actual black-and-white Mickey Mouse and Pete featured as characters.

I'm not sure derivative works based on Steamboat Willie will allow every one of those examples. I think the advertisement one would likely be tricky with Disney aggressively enforcing their trademark. A lot of those others would certainly happen. Keep in mind there are plenty of Disney versions of public domain characters and Disney is quite capable of fighting the distinction. No one can get away with making Aladdin's Genie look like the movie version, for example. Granted, that's a literary character in the public domain so I'll grant that Mickey is different, but there will definitely be a lot of lawsuits and threatened lawsuits based on companies going too far.

Honestly, by the time Action Comics #1 enters the public domain, we'll probably have quite a bit of case law on this precise issue already litigated with more in the pipeline.

[JudicatorPrime]

This a fun one to discuss. There's a part of me that thinks that Marvel using Superman would actually benefit DC. They'll be limited in how far they can go with the PD aspects of the character, which might drive readers to the source of the material in current form, i.e., DC Comics.

Take a character like the Hulk, for example. For purposes of this discussion, let's say hypothetically the original Hulk (what we see in his very first issue) became PD, but you couldn't use any other aspect of his lore post issue #1. DC and other companies pick up the character, but readers find that that Hulk isn't nearly as interesting as the Hulk that evolved over time. Where are those readers going to go to scratch that itch? Back to Marvel. DC may very well turn their version of PD Hulk into something unique and special for their base, but my gut tells me that they'll just be whetting palates for the real deal. Kind of like what happens after a carnivore eats their first veggie burger.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

This a fun one to discuss. There's a part of me that thinks that Marvel using Superman would actually benefit DC. They'll be limited in how far they can go with the PD aspects of the character, which might drive readers to the source of the material in current form, i.e., DC Comics.

Take a character like the Hulk, for example. For purposes of this discussion, let's say hypothetically the original Hulk (what we see in his very first issue) became PD, but you couldn't use any other aspect of his lore post issue #1. DC and other companies pick up the character, but readers find that that Hulk isn't nearly as interesting as the Hulk that evolved over time. Where are those readers going to go to scratch that itch? Back to Marvel. DC may very well turn their version of PD Hulk into something unique and special for their base, but my gut tells me that they'll just be whetting palates for the real deal. Kind of like what happens after a carnivore eats their first veggie burger.

In Superman's case, though, Golden Age Superman who deals with real political issues and is a Champion of the Oppressed is arguably more interesting than what DC has done with Superman in recent years. The Cold War "Family Values" Superman of the Silver Age has arguably hurt the character in the long run and has gotten him unfairly associated with old-school Conservative ideas, while Post-Crisis Superman has been all over the place from being "dark" to being too Peter Parker-esque. The most successful take on Superman in recent years has been Morrison's take in All-Star Superman and Action Comics, which is more similar to his Golden Age incarnation and is arguably what audiences wanna see. If Marvel puts out a Superman similar to the one from 1938 while DC continues doing what they've done with the character in recent decades, Marvel might actually beat DC to the punch in regards to delivering a good Superman.

The good news is that DC would then be forced to make the Golden Age/Morrison take on Superman the "norm" again in all mediums just to keep up with Marvel's.

[JudicatorPrime]

In Superman's case, though, Golden Age Superman who deals with real political issues and is a Champion of the Oppressed is arguably more interesting than what DC has done with Superman in recent years. The Cold War "Family Values" Superman of the Silver Age has arguably hurt the character in the long run and has gotten him unfairly associated with old-school Conservative ideas, while Post-Crisis Superman has been all over the place from being "dark" to being too Peter Parker-esque. The most successful take on Superman in recent years has been Morrison's take in All-Star Superman and Action Comics, which is more similar to his Golden Age incarnation and is arguably what audiences wanna see. If Marvel puts out a Superman similar to the one from 1938 while DC continues doing what they've done with the character in recent decades, Marvel might actually beat DC to the punch in regards to delivering a good Superman.

The good news is that DC would then be forced to make the Golden Age/Morrison take on Superman the "norm" again in all mediums just to keep up with Marvel's.

Right, but in that scenario once DC has Superman properly recalibrated and framed, then Marvel's version of him likely becomes the afterthought. At least that's what my hypothetical suggests. Eventually, inevitably, existing fans crave the original. Maybe many years down the road new fans who have no concept of the Superman original source material will make different choices as to which version of Superman they prefer, but I think that's a generation down the line. Marvel would only help DC fine tune its product and continue to draw the lion's share of Superman fans in the short term.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Right, but in that scenario once DC has Superman properly recalibrated and framed, then Marvel's version of him likely becomes the afterthought. At least that's what my hypothetical suggests. Eventually, inevitably, existing fans crave the original.

I don't know if audiences and fans will make much of a distinction, though. "Original Superman" to most people means he is Clark Kent, a Caucasian male with black hair who is a reporter and works at The Daily Planet in Metropolis. As long as Marvel keeps those elements their Superman would still be perceived as the original Superman. It would be different if we're talking about a Marvel Superman knockoff like Sentry, but in this case it's Superman himself.

Maybe many years down the road new fans who have no concept of the Superman original source material will make different choices as to which version of Superman they prefer, but I think that's a generation down the line.

The concept of the original Superman will very likely never go away or be forgotten, and for several reasons:

1. Action Comics #1 is too historically important for both the comics industry and for history in general. The Superman who punches Nazis is so iconic and intertwined with that time era that someone like Joseph Goebbels had to make a comment on him.

2. The Fleischer cartoons from that era likewise did a lot for animation.

3. Millenials and Zoomers are arguably even bigger fans of that Superman than the older generations. These two generations grew up in similar economic conditions to that of the Great Depression and don't have as much love for the Conservative Superman of the 1950's. Their first introduction to Superman comics was also likely to be through Morrison's work, whose values are more in line with Golden Age Superman. Based on that, it would be a long time before DC can sell a Superman that deviates from those values.

4. The most influential Superman writer of the 21st century so far has arguably been Grant Morrison. His two main works on Superman (All-Star & the Action Comics reboot) have been about bringing the classic Superman back and drawing attention to the character's history and working-class roots. Those comics will likewise be read for many more years to come.

Marvel would only help DC fine tune its product and continue to draw the lion's share of Superman fans in the short term.

On paper, DC will always be a serious competitor for Marvel when it comes to Superman. In practice, it's not as clear how it will play out... at least with the film and comics department. Both Warner Bros. and DC Comics for decades now have struggled with Superman, and also against Disney/Marvel in general. Disney and Marvel have both generally been more savvy and a bit more in touch with their consumers than the former. I mean, DC/WB has at times been desperately clueless. Their newest plans of putting out a black Superman to cash in on the success of Black Panther is only the most recent example on their list of bad ideas of keeping up with their competitors.

The animation department is a bit different due to DC's success with animation over the years.

[Killerbee911]

....I'm not sure if flying via telekinesis would be enough of a differential for Marvel to get away with, honestly. But like I've said, copyright/trademark is a part of business that I didn't study much. Rocket boots, a flying motorcycle (his original space ship perhaps?), those would probably be allowed but my guess is that any kind of self-propelled flight would be a non-starter.

Yeah that is why I said "float" or "levitate" and he would "glide" and "propel" while in the air to move with TK. I am familiar enough with copyright sometimes you can tap dance around stuff like that so he could have Ice vision and heat breath as well but having your stuff in litigation again and again over silly stuff isn't worth it. Especially when you could just use Sentry or Hyperion characters who avoid that type of scrutiny. For Marvel it is not worth it

[Ascended]

Yeah that is why I said "float" or "levitate" and he would "glide" and "propel" while in the air to move with TK. I am familiar enough with copyright sometimes you can tap dance around stuff like that so he could have Ice vision and heat breath as well but having your stuff in litigation again and again over silly stuff isn't worth it. Especially when you could just use Sentry or Hyperion characters who avoid that type of scrutiny. For Marvel it is not worth it

The threat of litigation is why I'd expect a PD Superman to stick to what's open and not try to add in (many) new elements. Energy powers, flight, mental powers....stuff like that could cross a line with some random, half-forgotten era of comics and become a legal entanglement. Easier to mostly just stick to what's on the page of Action #1 and adjust the details for the MU. And more classic elements like flight (1941) and kryptonite ('43) would become available fairly quickly, by the timescale of comics.

And no, I don't think a public domain Superman would really be all that worthwhile for Marvel. Lucrative, certainly; even after decades of DC mismanagement Clark pulls in more merchandise money than any comic character except Batman and Spidey (the Avengers have to team up to move more merchandise than Clark) and his comics still rank in the Top 50, if not the Top 25. Pretty good for a guy who doesn't have a string of successful films and games, and who's comics are often ignored, abused, or strip mined for material to give to other characters. But depending on how the legal precedent is set, it'd certainly be a pain in the ass that Marvel simply doesn't need to contend with, they're already the #1 comic publisher and the MCU is the biggest thing in pop culture these days. They don't need Superman at all.....but that doesn't mean they might not decide to use him if they could do so with a minimum of hassle from Warners, and/or if the working relationship between DC and Marvel soured.

I could see the indies using a PD Superman before Marvel....but I also can't say for certain that Marvel wouldn't take advantage either, if certain things lined up right; it *is* Superman after all, and even with some subpar comics and films he's a bigger deal than pretty much anyone else.