Ditko Estate Lawsuit

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I find your comparison of this to the abolishment of slavery and legalization of same-sex marriage extremely trivializing, and I feel I have already made all the points I wanted to concerning this case and the slippery slope you seem to be on board with, so I’ll let you have the last word.

I am sorry we disagree on this. I do think fans of characters or IP need to question their identification and liking for a franchise. That's not saying anyone needs to burn their comics collection or feel guilty about liking their comics but they need to rethink their relationship with Spider-Man and above all Marvel as a company. I apologize if I've not been effective in making that argument.

[IamnotJudasTraveller]

What is brewing is that the window for filing termination notices for early 1960s Marvel is currently open but starting to close up. So creators and their heirs have to file termination notices now or never and Marvel/Disney has to sue to get courts to invalidate the notices.

I posted the below on another thread so I'll put it here as well:

Pretty fascinating info, thanks. The Supreme Court is what caught my eye, especially because of the political connections it brings that are wholly unavoidable - I remember the "will they, won't they" 'embargo' of sorts when Disney purchased Fox and the antitrust lawsuits. There was just so much power and money behind it that even if they 'mulled over' the legalese, I think very few people actually thought they might actually stop the merger when it's all said and done.

[Ravin' Ray]

For what it's worth Revolutionary_Jack, although you may come off at times as harsh and very direct in your indictment of Marvel/Disney, you are consistent, and I respect that even if I feel uncomfortable reading them.

[HypnoHustler]

I am sorry we disagree on this. I do think fans of characters or IP need to question their identification and liking for a franchise. That's not saying anyone needs to burn their comics collection or feel guilty about liking their comics but they need to rethink their relationship with Spider-Man and above all Marvel as a company. I apologize if I've not been effective in making that argument.

You don’t need to apologize. There were no personal attacks, so there’s no hard feelings. It’s okay to disagree. Fwiw, I’m not against the Ditko estate getting a settlement (although I would’ve preferred it while he was alive).

[Shunt]

There’s no ethical consumption in capitalism.

LOL. Talk about rationalising

[Agent Z]

That was before the age of social media and the rise of populism. If Disney stops Mickey Mouse from becoming public domain in the next few years, my feeling is it will immediately be all over Instagram and other social media sites. It wouldn't look good for them.

I guess we'll wait and see. My point is, it's not gonna be that easy for Disney to do it.

Disney's been doing a lot of things that don't look good for them even in the digital age. How much damage has it actually done to them?

[Dzika_Sowa]

One reason the lawsuit is happening is timing related. You do not have forever to file these suits. As for NO Peter Spider-Man. The way it can happen is this: The Ditko Estate files for a “Temporary” Restraining Order against anyone using Ditko created ( or inspired creations ( see MJ) and characters such as Strange, Peter, Otto, Norman, AMAZING Spider-Man (Note: I am separating Amazing Peter from Miles, Ben etc for obvious reasons) etc until a trial ( and of course appeals). Others such as Ghost Spider, Lady Octopus and Francine might be off limits as well. Of course the restraining order is NOT guaranteed. That said, Marvel can still use Ben or Miles as primary just not AMAZING Spider-Man ( along with post Ditko villains like Fisk and Carnage). We are already seeing a worst case scenario: It involves Friday The 13th. Creator ( and first Director) Sean S. Cunningham is suing New Line/Warner Bros for ownership of Jason, which is why we have not seen a new Jason movie in years.

*Cough* Spider-Man Beyond *cough*

I'm joking of course, but man. World without Spider-Man in Marvel, without Venom and everything that would be sad.

[Somecrazyaussie]

This is a ploy and a lure to get a settlement out of court. For the Ditko estate to get any footing they'll need to have concrete proof of how much the original work was Ditko and the rest Stan (And that debate has been going on for decades). The Siegel and Shuster situation is different because they created Superman and sold it later on. Stan, by being the writer and EiC, one could argue Spider-man was half created by an employee on the pay roll.

While artists absolutely should get their due, this smacks of relatives wanting a pay out. Which is likely what will happen. Unless Disney ties them in legal knots and they have deep pockets. Then again, Ditko's relatives can counter sue, file for injunctions, the works. So an out of court settlement is likely what will happen. Shame Steve himself didn't get that money. But, being a Randist, he wouldn't have taken it.

[FFJamie94]

Looking into it a bit more, this won't lead to Spider-man or Doctor Strange being taken out the MU.
The Ditko estate isn't even asking for full ownership, just co-ownership, so we'll still get these characters until the end of time.

All it'll mean is that Disney just get a bit less money. In that case, I hope the Ditko estate wins.

[NC_Yankee]

Looking into it a bit more, this won't lead to Spider-man or Doctor Strange being taken out the MU.
The Ditko estate isn't even asking for full ownership, just co-ownership, so we'll still get these characters until the end of time.

All it'll mean is that Disney just get a bit less money. In that case, I hope the Ditko estate wins.

I disagree 100% ( and I do not care for Disney). Why? This will not end with Spider-Man trust me. Maybe the Lee family demands the other 50% of Peter? Maybe 50% of MJ ( with the Estate of Romita sr wanting the other)? That is why Disney is suing over The Avengers. They know the Jack Kirby Estate will demand a piece of Hulk, Cap and Iron Man ( I doubt they can claim Thor because Kirby did not create him). I noted this yesterday: These kind of lawsuits are why there are no more Friday The 13th Movies being made ( the dispute between Creator and first Director Sean S. Cunningham and New Line/Warner Bros). Besides that, Stephen King is talking about taking back ownership of his movies ( starting with Salem’s Lot, Cat’s Eye and Misery).

[Kaitou D. Kid]

The Ditko Estate would never shelf Spider-Man. That would be the greatest gift they can give Disney and their PR team.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

For what it's worth Revolutionary_Jack, although you may come off at times as harsh and very direct in your indictment of Marvel/Disney, you are consistent, and I respect that even if I feel uncomfortable reading them.

The nearest thing to gospel truth in comics is this utterance by one of the great prophets:
"Kid, comics will break your heart."
-- Jack Kirby.

Stan, by being the writer and EiC, one could argue Spider-man was half created by an employee on the pay roll.

It's not "one could argue", that is the argument. Marvel as a company depends on Stan Lee for its hold on the IP and that's why Disney/Marvel as a corporation need to uphold the Stan Lee side of the Marvel Method narrative. Which is also why Marvel/Disney as a company cannot ever be relied on for disseminating truth.

While artists absolutely should get their due, this smacks of relatives wanting a pay out.

I have a question to ask. What cause have the Ditko Estate given anyone for making insinuations and accusations of them being greedy and so on? Until this week, nobody knew anything about Ditko's family on account of the man being famously private. Without proof you have people here, and not just here but elsewhere, rational and normal people in other contexts I will add, making accusations about a dead man's family asking redress for the exploitation of his labor. Does that strike anyone here as a graceful thing to do? The case with Ditko is not at all like Stan Lee where at the time of his death he had a public falling out with his daughter and we have documented and corroborated evidence that his final years were a total s--tshow and claims of "elder abuse".

We don't know anything or a great deal about Ditko's personal life but the few things we do know point to him being close with his family from his early to his late years. Unless people bring out new evidence, making insinuations and claims is irresponsible. The lawyer representing Ditko Estate, and Larry Leiber, Gene Colan's Estate and others is Marc Toberoff who had success securing royalties for Ray Charles' music and Jim Brown's music for their families. Are you going to say it's a bad thing for the families of iconic African-American artists to get royalties for a musician whose work was exploited by a white-dominated music industry? Are you going to say that it's wrong for Athena Finger, Bill's grand-daughter to get royalties for grandpa's stolen work? Sure Ditko didn't have direct relatives but you know what Peter Parker isn't directly related to Aunt May either, obviously he owes her nothing because they aren't blood relatives you know.

I have to say seeing so many whine about new Spider-Man content to the point they attack Ditko's family and make aspersions about them is the most profoundly disappointing thing about this.

[Frontier]

Looking into it a bit more, this won't lead to Spider-man or Doctor Strange being taken out the MU.
The Ditko estate isn't even asking for full ownership, just co-ownership, so we'll still get these characters until the end of time.

All it'll mean is that Disney just get a bit less money. In that case, I hope the Ditko estate wins.

That sounds fine to me.

[FFJamie94]

I disagree 100% ( and I do not care for Disney). Why? This will not end with Spider-Man trust me. Maybe the Lee family demands the other 50% of Peter? Maybe 50% of MJ ( with the Estate of Romita sr wanting the other)? That is why Disney is suing over The Avengers. They know the Jack Kirby Estate will demand a piece of Hulk, Cap and Iron Man ( I doubt they can claim Thor because Kirby did not create him). I noted this yesterday: These kind of lawsuits are why there are no more Friday The 13th Movies being made ( the dispute between Creator and first Director Sean S. Cunningham and New Line/Warner Bros). Besides that, Stephen King is talking about taking back ownership of his movies ( starting with Salem’s Lot, Cat’s Eye and Misery).

The Kirby situation has already been settled, which gives what's going on now a precident.

They won't get Co ownership, we're dealing with contracts that were made 60 years before this new laws were put into place.
They will settle, probably come to some sort of agreement And life will go on.

Lee also pretty much sold his shared to Marvel earning himself some of the profits. So Lee didn't hold the rights to Spider-man, but became the face for Marvel instead.

[Webhead]

Spider-Man will never go away, that's for sure. There's no business in the disappearance of the property.