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

[JackDaw]

Creator rights are something I must admit I yo yo on. Certainly think most of the golden and silver age creators were ruthlessly and unfairly treated...along with many others in all sorts of employment.

Today more ambivalent.

I could...in this case certainly relate to a comment I saw elsewhere which said effectively “Come on, Ed B signed this contract in 2005. He’s a knowledge-able guy, he knew he was signing a work for hire contract, he had other options, but he choose the one he did because at time he thought it was best for him”.

Deep down I think there’s really not a strong moral case for saying Marvel or Disney owe him more.

I might well have more sympathy with him if I knew more of the details. On other hard, I might feel less...if for example..the “pittance” he rejected was actually a lot of money by my standards.

[Agent Z]

edited post.

[Besouro]

https://io9.gizmodo.com/marvels-wint...omi-1846690659

Didn't Marvel also have some serious issues with the guy who created Isaiah Bradley (and his descendants Josiah X and Patriot)?!?

How did they resolve that to allow Isaiah to be in Falcon and WS tv show?!

Ed Brubaker should probably took to the creator of Isaiah Bradley.

[JackDaw]

Didn't Marvel also have some serious issues with the guy who created Isaiah Bradley (and his descendants Josiah X and Patriot)?!?

How did they resolve that to allow Isaiah to be in Falcon and WS tv show?!

Ed Brubaker should probably took to the creator of Isaiah Bradley.

It was Robert Morales (I think), don’t know of any contract disputes he had with Marvel (his run on Captain America ended early, but thought that was down to fan reaction to run.)

Ed B would find it difficult to talk to him, alas...Robert Morales died in 2013.

[Drops Of Venus]

Same problem since Watchmen. That's why I have no respect for writers like Tom king, who know how this line of work is hard, and betray their fellow workers, like Alan Moore.

I wouldn't say it's the SAME problem as Watchmen because, from my understanding, what happened with Alan Moore was that he was led to believe he would get the rights to Watchmen back, only for DC to find a loophole and not give him the rights back ever. It was a case where the publisher chose to specifically break their initial promise to the artist, which is probably where most of the resentment comes from. In Winter Soldier's case, I find it hard to believe Marvel ever promised Brubaker anything of the sort. It's not like he wrote that story in older times, either. It was a 2000s creation, and by that time, I think everyone knew exactly how Marvel operated with their IPs. I'm not saying that, as an artist, he doesn't have the right to feel entitled to get more recognition for his work (he does, and I sympathize with that), but it was one of those cases of ''knowing exactly what you signed up for''. He can say it was a bad deal and I won't even disagree with him, but he wasn't tricked into taking that deal the same way Moore was.

Didn't Marvel also have some serious issues with the guy who created Isaiah Bradley (and his descendants Josiah X and Patriot)?!?

How did they resolve that to allow Isaiah to be in Falcon and WS tv show?!

Ed Brubaker should probably took to the creator of Isaiah Bradley.

We don't really know what happened with Robert Morales. And he didn't create Josiah or Patriot; those characters were apparently only caught in the issue for being directly connected to the character who was actually the root of the issue. The issue, exactly, is still unclear. We had some vague references to ''legal issues'' with the character, but it was never explained what exactly happened or how it got resolved. It's still a mystery, but it looks like it just quietly went away and Marvel will probably act like it never happened.

[Besouro]

Creator rights are something I must admit I yo yo on. Certainly think most of the golden and silver age creators were ruthlessly and unfairly treated...along with many others in all sorts of employment.

Today more ambivalent.

I could...in this case certainly relate to a comment I saw elsewhere which said effectively “Come on, Ed B signed this contract in 2005. He’s a knowledge-able guy, he knew he was signing a work for hire contract, he had other options, but he choose the one he did because at time he thought it was best for him”.

Deep down I think there’s really not a strong moral case for saying Marvel or Disney owe him more.

I might well have more sympathy with him if I knew more of the details. On other hard, I might feel less...if for example..the “pittance” he rejected was actually a lot of money by my standards.

There IS a "strong moral case" for Brubaker.... Just not much of a legal case!

[Besouro]

It was Robert Morales (I think), don’t know of any contract disputes he had with Marvel (his run on Captain America ended early, but thought that was down to fan reaction to run.)

Ed B would find it difficult to talk to him, alas...Robert Morales died in 2013.

Ooh snap......Robert Morales died, I didn't know that. Thanx for the update.

[JackDaw]

There IS a "strong moral case" for Brubaker.... Just not much of a legal case!

I think it is at least debatable whether there is a strong moral case.

Ed B signed a contract knowing he would get a rate of pay that he was happy with, got a significant readership (that would benefit him in other ventures), and left him sufficient time to pursue other ventures...and signed that deal knowing there was no right to future royalties.

Even with benefit of hindsight was that really a bad deal for him?

Is there really a moral imperative to be generous?

And if so, how much qualifies as generous?

Ed B himself says (and I believe him) that when projects he controls become more successful than he expected he is generous in awarding money to contributors that is over and above the contractual requirement.

But what would be his reaction be if he awarded some one an amount over the contract and he was told “Shove it” and then his ex-employee moaned publicly about Ed?

I guess what I am saying is that for me to a large extent it does matter what Ed was offered...I am not willing to take the line it must be too small whatever it was because he is unhappy.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I wouldn't say it's the SAME problem as Watchmen

1) It's not.

2) Being an entirely different form of exploitation doesn't mean it's not exploitation.

...because, from my understanding, what happened with Alan Moore was that he was led to believe he would get the rights to Watchmen back, only for DC to find a loophole and not give him the rights back ever.

That's basically true. The actual nuts and blots has a few more moving parts, but yeah it's true that DC used a loophole to screw over Moore.

In Winter Soldier's case, I find it hard to believe Marvel ever promised Brubaker anything of the sort.

Brubaker is not making an issue of broken promises, he's making an issue about a lack of kindness and generosity.

I'm not saying that, as an artist, he doesn't have the right to feel entitled to get more recognition for his work (he does, and I sympathize with that), but it was one of those cases of ''knowing exactly what you signed up for''.

1) "Knowing exactly what you signed up for" doesn't mean acts of exploitation are permitted or acceptable. People who sign "NDA" also know what they sign up for but if you keep quiet about workplace harassment or knowledge of sexual abuse at firm because you sign a NDA you won't find much, or any, sympathy today.

2) At the time Brubaker wrote WS, he was
-- Working for a Company that Five years back exited bankruptcy
-- The MCU wasn't in the pipeline or become any juggernaut.
-- He was working on a title and character that as far as he knew would be last-in-line to ever get adapted for the movies.

So not only did he not know or expect, nobody at Marvel did at that time.

He can say it was a bad deal and I won't even disagree with him, but he wasn't tricked into taking that deal the same way Moore was.

It doesn't matter. Exploitation comes in different shapes and forms. And in the comics business, exploitation takes on the form of gaslighting at a real insidious level because companies have a way of turning fans against creators or making it appear that the creator is whining and so on.

Even with benefit of hindsight was that really a bad deal for him?

Yeah it is.

Is there really a moral imperative to be generous?

If the principle of the US Economy at present is that capitalism is open to reform, and that billionaires getting wealth will eventually trickle down, then people are entitled to take them at their word whenever they get the chance.

[lefthanded]

Far too often this happens with TV shows. Look at Seinfeld - still in syndication, still making huge money (from Netflix, most recently). Yet the main cast members don't see much of that huge money (aside from Jerry), since they aren't considered owners. Like Brubaker, these actors and actresses were integral to developing and bringing a character to life, but don't have ownership.

It is the same question here: Should the owners, show more generosity to the individuals that helped make a product successful? In most people's eyes, the answer is yes, but then there is varying feelings as to what constitutes generosity.

For this current situation, it seems like in Marvel's eyes, being generous means giving Brubaker a cameo and offering a small credit. In Brubaker's eyes, being generous would have meant more in the ways of royalties.

[Brian B]

Creator greed always brings out the ugly in the industry.

I hope you’re kidding.

[JackDaw]

Yeah it is.

Not being generous is unfair...I agree.

But let me pose a hypothetical question to you...If one of your kids was a talented writer, and Disney offered him a substantial amount of money for a work for hire deal, that you knew would get him (or her) really well known if successful would you really say without thinking “tell them to sod off”?

Pretty sure I wouldn’t...though of course I’d point out potential pros and cons..if kid wanted advice.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

But let me pose a hypothetical question to you...If one of your kids was a talented writer, and Disney offered him a substantial amount of money for a work for hire deal, that you knew would get him (or her) really well known if successful would you really say without thinking “tell them to sod off”?

Pretty sure I wouldn’t...though of course I’d point out potential pros and cons..if kid wanted advice.

This is pedantic, but I need to point out that when Brubaker worked for Marvel it wasn't bought by Disney yet.

In the case of Brubaker, he was working on a title (Captain America) and reviving a title (Bucky Barnes) that was generally speaking not in the top tier of the Marvel line, nor was Bucky a character that was iconic. Let's put it this way, Bucky being killed off (which was done in a quick flashback) didn't provoke a reactiion the way for instance Jason Todd's death in the '80s was a big deal or Superman's death in the '90s was a big deal. Well before he worked at Marvel, Brubaker made a name for himself at DC and in independent comics so he was a known name at the time and not his first big gig.

Let's put it this way, suppose me, my friends or my kid (i am not old enough to be a Dad in any case) is an active freelance writer of fiction,
-- I'd push them to get himself an agent and a lawyer, and also tell'em to make a go in screenwriting or legitimate publishing.
-- If Disney comes and offers a substantial amount for a work-for-hire deal and they are working on a TaleSpin TV show revolving on Kit i.e. a TV-only character and then through my actuaintance becomes a big breakout and crossover star, then I would ask them to summon the lawyers and get a bigger deal.

After all that's what happened with Don Rosa. Don Rosa is an artist-writer who writes the best Uncle Scrooge and Donald Duck stories after Carl Barks. He is work-for-hire and studiously works on pre-existing characters, avoiding creating anyone new when possible. His comics are popular, they sell well, a graphic novel even wins major awards. And Disney start promoting his run using his name without his permission and give him no additional money or health benefits. Meanwhile his run is harvested by Disney for the upcoming Duck Tales 2017 show.
https://career-end.donrosa.de/

Don Rosa as he points out knew the score, new the deal, and he still feels betrayed and humiliated for his lifetime of passion.

[Alan2099]

Not being generous is unfair...I agree.

That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Being fair is being fair.

Being generous is being more than fair.

Ed got paid for the work he did knowing that he wouldn't own any of it. That's fair.
What he wants is for them to be generous since his work was such a hit and give him more money than they had original agreed on.

[JackDaw]

This is pedantic, but I need to point out that when Brubaker worked for Marvel it wasn't bought by Disney yet.

In the case of Brubaker, he was working on a title (Captain America) and reviving a title (Bucky Barnes) that was generally speaking not in the top tier of the Marvel line, nor was Bucky a character that was iconic. Let's put it this way, Bucky being killed off (which was done in a quick flashback) didn't provoke a reactiion the way for instance Jason Todd's death in the '80s was a big deal or Superman's death in the '90s was a big deal. Well before he worked at Marvel, Brubaker made a name for himself at DC and in independent comics so he was a known name at the time and not his first big gig.

Let's put it this way, suppose me, my friends or my kid (i am not old enough to be a Dad in any case) is an active freelance writer of fiction,
-- I'd push them to get himself an agent and a lawyer, and also tell'em to make a go in screenwriting or legitimate publishing.
-- If Disney comes and offers a substantial amount for a work-for-hire deal and they are working on a TaleSpin TV show revolving on Kit i.e. a TV-only character and then through my actuaintance becomes a big breakout and crossover star, then I would ask them to summon the lawyers and get a bigger deal.

After all that's what happened with Don Rosa. Don Rosa is an artist-writer who writes the best Uncle Scrooge and Donald Duck stories after Carl Barks. He is work-for-hire and studiously works on pre-existing characters, avoiding creating anyone new when possible. His comics are popular, they sell well, a graphic novel even wins major awards. And Disney start promoting his run using his name without his permission and give him no additional money or health benefits. Meanwhile his run is harvested by Disney for the upcoming Duck Tales 2017 show.
https://career-end.donrosa.de/

Don Rosa as he points out knew the score, new the deal, and he still feels betrayed and humiliated for his lifetime of passion.

In general, I think I’ve just become more pragmatic (or cynical) as I get older.

I usually find myself agreeing with you on what is unfair or fair...but often coming at problems from point of view of accepting the grim framework of how the world actually works and taking the most practical way forward within that dark design.


Effectively I think it’s a waste of time (and emotionally draining) to expect Marvel or Disney to be generous...just negotiate best contract you can and move on.