Ed Brubabker Criticizes Disney/Marvel For Lack Of Winter Soldier Royalties

[Brian B]

To me this is all nuts. Thor has made marvel/disney Billions. Thor is a public domain character. Now are people arguing well what about the people who have wrote Thor comics over the years don't they deserve part of the royalties from these Thor and Avengers movies? The Thor character isn't anything like the guy the Norse people invented 2000 years ago. So these comic writers and just pick one have done their own various versions of Thor. Do these guys get royalties? What if Jane Foster becomes Thor in the next movie? Does that guy who made Jane Foster deserve royalties? And say you say well yes the guy who wrote Jane Foster Thor deserves royalties. Wait he wasn't the first to do Jane Foster Thor. It was actually done in a what if comic back in the 70s. So this gets crazy convoluted.

Your choice of Thor is kind of funny, given the decades Kirby and the Kirby estate fought to have Kirby’s rights recognized. Note that when it got to the Supreme Court, Marvel and Disney finally chose to settle and pay the Kirby estate for Kirby’s creation of Thor, among other Marvel characters, rather than gamble the entire Disney empire on the hopes of a favorable verdict for Marvel / Disney.

Anyway, I’m not claiming Brubaker’s situation is the same as Kirby’s. It would just be ethical for Disney to reward Brubaker more. That’s all.

[JackDaw]

Is there really any industry where a fixed price job leads to an unexpected subsequent success where a non contractual “wow”payment would normally be made?

(I can not think of any. Certainly in the ones I have worked in, norm is nothing at all, or at best a token bonus, maybe an enhanced chance of future work, because competence proven).

[DT Winslow]

Your version of capitalism is unfortunately what many corporations practice. See Brubaker’s non-existent royalties on Winter Soldier for details.

What I am suggesting is not “redistribution of wealth.” Taxes, social policy and socialism never entered this conversation.

What I’m talking about would in capitalist terms would be the very non-radical concept called a “bonus,” “award” or “reward.”

Remind me to never work for you.

Bonuses are great. I used to budget for them every year. Plus everyone got a bonus for every apartment they rented and then a piece of the pot from renewals. That is all part of capitalism.

You want those bonuses to extend past employment. I don’t still get bonuses from my old job three years ago.

But you still haven’t answered the question. Why ‘should’ Disney do that? Again, Brubaker didn’t take on the risk when he created Winter Soldier so he doesn’t get a reward beyond the initial terms of the contract, which includes bonuses and residuals. Why does he deserve more now?

[inisideguy]

Your choice of Thor is kind of funny, given the decades Kirby and the Kirby estate fought to have Kirby’s rights recognized. Note that when it got to the Supreme Court, Marvel and Disney finally chose to settle and pay the Kirby estate for Kirby’s creation of Thor, among other Marvel characters, rather than gamble the entire Disney empire on the hopes of a verdict for Marvel / Disney.

Anyway, I’m not claiming Brubaker’s situation is the same as Kirby’s. It would just be ethical for Disney to reward Brubaker more.

The whole thing is crazy. You guys are arguing that taking a character and making a change to that character means the creator who made the change to the original character deserves royalties. Lets take Star Lord. Are you arguing that the guy who made the modern day Star lord, that is portrayed in the Disney movies in some ways deserves royalties. Or are you saying the person who created Star Lord in the first place deserves Royalties?

[Brian B]

Is there really any industry where a fixed price job leads to an unexpected subsequent success where a non contractual “wow”payment would normally be made?

(I can not think of any. Certainly in the ones I have worked in, norm is nothing at all, or at best a token bonus, maybe an enhanced chance of future work, because competence proven).

Yes, there are such jobs and companies. I’m sorry for you that you haven’t experienced that. There’s all sorts of ways to structure such things, but stock grants aren’t that uncommon and if you hang onto the stock, the rewards can continue for years and years after you leave a job.

[ed2962]

DC has/had some sort of program where creators would receive incentive checks for characters they created being used in other mediums. I'm not sure if it's still a thing since I know Alex Ross recently complained that his checks had stopped coming after AT&T took over. I think Marvel having a similar policy for its creators would be good, especially when you see how heavily comics from the last 20 years have influenced various adaptations (not just the MCU).

Though in that case Brubaker might still not have anything, since apparently the payments didn't cover "derivative" characters.

I think Marvel does have a similar program, but I think it depends on when the character was created. I believe the problem here ( hence why Ed is kicking himself) is that Winter Soldier is Bucky who was created by Simon/Kirby. Had WS been a completely new character "Chucky Carlson" or something...Brubaker would probably gotten a check or two from his appearances in the movies. As it is, Disney is making money from his story ideas and he's getting nothing aside from a credit.

Steve Englehart was upset for similar reasons when Nolan's Dark Knight came out. He felt the plot was based on a couple of Batman stories he did, but he wasn't getting paid for his ideas.

[Brian B]

Bonuses are great. I used to budget for them every year. Plus everyone got a bonus for every apartment they rented and then a piece of the pot from renewals. That is all part of capitalism.

You want those bonuses to extend past employment. I don’t still get bonuses from my old job three years ago.

But you still haven’t answered the question. Why ‘should’ Disney do that? Again, Brubaker didn’t take on the risk when he created Winter Soldier so he doesn’t get a reward beyond the initial terms of the contract, which includes bonuses and residuals. Why does he deserve more now?

Dude, you are a scrooge. Again, I will never work for you. You sound like a crappy boss.

[JackDaw]

Your version of capitalism is unfortunately what many corporations practice. See Brubaker’s non-existent royalties on Winter Soldier for details.

What I am suggesting is not “redistribution of wealth.” Taxes, social policy and socialism never entered this conversation.

What I’m talking about would in capitalist terms be the very non-radical concept called a “bonus,” “award” or “reward.”

Remind me to never work for you.

Of course, bonus, awards, rewards happen in all sorts of industries. But rarely at a really significant level if there’s no contractual obligation, and very rarely if person no longer works for organisation concerned.

I maybe misinterpreted what Ed Brubaker wrote...but I thought there was suggestion he’d been offered some money, but didn’t regard it as enough...that he was expecting more than a fairly modest “thank you”. That would be an unusual practice.

[DT Winslow]

Dude, you are a scrooge. Again, I will never work for you. You sound like a crappy boss.

I’m sure you’ll never know. I might be a miser. I might give generously to charity. And that’s not the name of a stripper I know.

But you can’t answer a simple question without name calling.

[JackDaw]

Yes, there are such jobs and companies. I’m sorry for you that you haven’t experienced that. There’s all sorts of ways to structure such things, but stock grants aren’t that uncommon and if you hang onto the stock, the rewards can continue for years and years after you leave a job.

I’ve had stock options...but they were agreed as part of contract, not an optional thank thank years after I moved on.

That’s the norm I think. (And I do mean norm...I know there are exceptionally generous owners/ organisations that go way over what they need to do contractually...but really think it’s unrealistic to expect non contractual largesse very often.)

[Brian B]

The whole thing is crazy. You guys are arguing that taking a character and making a change to that character means the creator who made the change to the original character deserves royalties. Lets take Star Lord. Are you arguing that the guy who made the modern day Star lord, that is portrayed in the Disney movies in some ways deserves royalties. Or are you saying the person who created Star Lord in the first place deserves Royalties?

You’re referring to Steve Englehart, then Keith Giffen and Abnett and Lanning. Yeah, I think it would be great for Marvel / Disney to reward all of these creators.

Folks, comics and in particular Marvel and DC have long histories of screwing over creators. It’s undeniable. See Jack Kirby for details. I’d love it if Marvel / Disney started to award and reward these creators more for concepts they’re making billions off of.

I think in most of these cases, there is no legal obligation. But it would be a good thing to do. I don’t expect it to happen. But no one is going to convince me that Marvel and DC Comics publishing model for decades was unethical and legally dubious at best. This isn’t some datk industry secret. This is well documented. Look at how DC treated Siegel and Shuster, or how Marvel treated Kirby.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

You’re confusing legal obligations with ethical ones. No one is claiming Brubaker didn’t get exactly what he agreed to get. I and we are saying he earned Disney a LOT of money. Disney should share some of that wealth he earned for them is all I and we are saying.

PREACH!!!!

And say you say well yes the guy who wrote Jane Foster Thor deserves royalties. Wait he wasn't the first to do Jane Foster Thor. It was actually done in a what if comic back in the 70s. So this gets crazy convoluted.

Getting crazy convoluted is not an excuse to stiff people over.

He assumed no risk in the situation.

Assumed no risk is laughable. At the time Brubaker revived Bucky, he was breaking a major taboo in comics, since Bucky was one of the few characters people assumed would and never could be revived. He had to justify the resurrection by writing a great and essential story and likewise establishing that Bucky could work as a serialized character. Brubaker thought of everything and he assumed the risk.

From the point of Marvel, there was no risk. They allow the story...if it's bad they retcon things and make the character some impostor. IF it's good they get a new toy to play with.

When the MCU came up, they had Winter Soldier on the stands so they were able to plan with foresight to introduce a character to a large audience who would never know or guess that the original version of Bucky was a different character. So tell me what risk was assumed by Marvel?

Captain America was never a major top-selling ongoing title and Brubaker's run on comics was the first time in more than a decade that people thought Cap was an exciting title to follow and read up. So Marvel bore no risk there.

Remind me to never work for you.

Preach more!

[DT Winslow]

You’re referring to Steve Englehart, then Keith Giffen and Abnett and Lanning. Yeah, I think it would be great for Marvel / Disney to reward all of these creators.

Folks, comics and in particular Marvel and DC have long histories of screwing over creators. It’s undeniable. See Jack Kirby for details. I’d love it if Marvel / Disney started to award and reward these creators more for concept they’re making billions off of.

I think in most of these cases, there is no legal obligation. But it would be a good thing to do. I don’t expect it to happen. But no one is going to convince me that Marvel and DC Comics publishing model for decades was unethical and legally dubious at best. This isn’t some datk industry secret. This is well documented. Look at how DC treated Siegel and Shuster, or how Marvel treated Kirby.

Yes. But in what way was Brubaker treated unfairly?

[Brian B]

I’m sure you’ll never know. I might be a miser. I might give generously to charity. And that’s not the name of a stripper I know.

But you can’t answer a simple question without name calling.

I answered your questions. You choose to ignore. And yeah, you’re a scrooge. I personally have received bonuses and unexpected rewards. I know others who have as well. Some of those were for stock grants and other things that continue to generate financial rewards for years after that job was over. Just because that’s not your work experience doesn’t mean that’s not how capitalism works. In fact, at a good, ethical company, that’s exactly how it should work. That’s capitalism. That these concepts are so alien to your personal notions of capitalism tells me you are a scrooge and I would never, ever work for you. Heck, I’ve worked at companies I would consider to have been “bad” or unethical in some regard, and they STILL gave unexpected awards and bonuses that paid for years. Your definition and experience of capitalism is exactly what’s wrong with business and corporations these days. It’s like Roger said on Mad Men, “It’s ALWAYS about the money!”

[DT Winslow]

I answered your questions. You choose to ignore. And yeah, you’re a scrooge. I personally have received bonuses and unexpected rewards. I know others who have as well. Some of those were for stock grants and other things that continue to generate financial rewards for years after that job was over. Just because that’s not your work experience doesn’t mean that’s not how capitalism works. In fact, at a good, ethical company, that’s exactly how it should work. That’s capitalism. That these concepts are so alien to your personal notions of capitalism tells me you are a scrooge and I would never, ever work for you. Heck, I’ve worked at companies I would consider to have been “bad” or unethical in some regard, and they STILL gave unexpected awards and bonuses that paid for years. Your definition and experience of capitalism is exactly what’s wrong with business and corporations these days. It’s like Roger said on Mad Men, “It’s ALWAYS about the money!”

None of this is foreign or alien to me and I find it odd you’d prescribe thoughts to a stranger asking you questions.

I do not think you have answered the question other than screaming the word bonuses and calling me names. I’ve worked for years in supervisory capacities, making sure every month and quarter that proper bonuses and rewards and awards are given out. I get bonuses but what you’re saying isn’t a bonus or stock option scenario. Not even akin to a 401k.

You say that Disney should give a sum of money to a former contractor years later just because they can afford it.

Why should they? You and Jack continue to deflect away from this basic question. Why do I give bonuses to my team? They earned them. I’m more than happy to do it. They deserve more. What does Brubaker deserve and why does he deserve it?