When DC loses Wonder Woman's rights.

[phonogram12]

I do. The world may end but some things will never change and its DC producing trinity products

Agreed. If DC can cut deals with the creators of Superman and even give Bill Finger his long overdue credit for creating Batman (legit thought that was never going to happen) they will easily and happily find a way to continue to produce entirely recognizable WW products for the foreseeable future and (most likely) far, far beyond.

[Top Hat]

There is no way for you to know that. Many things can happen.

No the companies will probably do what they did before get the politicians to extend the copyright laws. No way the mouse is losing the rights to Mickey for example.

[WonderLight789]

Agreed. If DC can cut deals with the creators of Superman and even give Bill Finger his long overdue credit for creating Batman (legit thought that was never going to happen) they will easily and happily find a way to continue to produce entirely recognizable WW products for the foreseeable future and (most likely) far, far beyond.

DC doesn't put the same effort with WW as they do BM and SM. So they will likely lose the rights. One way or another it will happen.

[WonderLight789]

No the companies will probably do what they did before get the politicians to extend the copyright laws. No way the mouse is losing the rights to Mickey for example.

With all the money they have lost. Let's see if DC has what it takes to do that.

[wonder39]

DC doesn't put the same effort with WW as they do BM and SM. So they will likely lose the rights. One way or another it will happen.

You can keep saying that, but even as an ip WW brings DC in lots of licensing money. They won't let that go.

You can keep saying '" ,they will", but let's say it's highly, highly highly unlikely they would lose WW as a property....

Major companies like Disney, etc, whose whole business is in these type characters , have been able to extend the dates of "losing" rights to a character. And they will continue to be able to do so.

I

[WonderLight789]

You can keep saying that, but even as an ip WW brings DC in lots of licensing money. They won't let that go.

You can keep saying '" ,they will", but let's say it's highly, highly highly unlikely they would lose WW as a property....

Major companies like Disney, etc, whose whole business is in these type characters , have been able to extend the dates of "losing" rights to a character. And they will continue to be able to do so.

I

We'll see. If the law is truly equal to all. Then that shouldn't happen.

And based on how much WW is treated like trash. I don't think she makes enough money for DC.

[Gaius]

We'll see. If the law is truly equal to all. Then that shouldn't happen.

And based on how much WW is treated like trash. I don't think she makes enough money for DC.

You're conflating your gripes with DC's current WW output with what WB/DC are legally obligated to do and own.

They're not gonna let the rights to WW lapse because you don't like she didn't kick Superman's ass in some random comic.

[WonderLight789]

You're conflating your gripes with DC's current WW output with what WB/DC are legally obligated to do and own.

They're not gonna let the rights to WW lapse because you don't like she didn't kick Superman's ass in some random comic.

I don't like how she is portrayed 90% of the time these days. But that is besides the point.

The law is supposed to be the same for everybody. So this sexist bigots shouldn't be allowed tyo break it.

[wonder39]

I don't like how she is portrayed 90% of the time these days. But that is besides the point.

The law is supposed to be the same for everybody. So this sexist bigots shouldn't be allowed tyo break it.

Its not breaking the law. The law changes as time goes by. Those laws were written at a time when things like this weren't thought of in the same context. Certainly no one thought that these characters would be the center of these business' mega empires, raking in billions.

And it makes no difference who the character is, or what company. If the company actively works towards maintaining the ownership of their property, then it shouldn't fall into public domain.

Your displeasure with how DC may or may not handle the character is you personal issue, and has nothing to due with the legality of ip ownership.

[WonderLight789]

Its not breaking the law. The law changes as time goes by. Those laws were written at a time when things like this weren't thought of in the same context. Certainly no one thought that these characters would be the center of these business' mega empires, raking in billions.

And it makes no difference who the character is, or what company. If the company actively works towards maintaining the ownership of their property, then it shouldn't fall into public domain.

Your displeasure with how DC may or may not handle the character is you personal issue, and has nothing to due with the legality of ip ownership.

False. The law clearly puts a limit to how long you can own an IP.

[HestiasHearth]

I used to believe that "there is no way that WB would ever let go of the Trinity as an IP," but stranger things have happened. I never ever imagined that George Lucas, for example, would EVER not own Star Wars. Little did I know. But yes, I still see WBD not owning Wonder Woman in the future highly unlikely.

[Gaius]

I don't like how she is portrayed 90% of the time these days. But that is besides the point.

The law is supposed to be the same for everybody. So this sexist bigots shouldn't be allowed tyo break it.

It should be besides the point but this thread is clearly routed in you not liking DC's current WW output.

They're not breaking the law in regards to their legal ownership of WW at the moment.

[Primal Slayer]

I used to believe that "there is no way that WB would ever let go of the Trinity as an IP," but stranger things have happened. I never ever imagined that George Lucas, for example, would EVER not own Star Wars. Little did I know. But yes, I still see WBD not owning Wonder Woman in the future highly unlikely.

While true, George Lucas is 1 person. WB is an entire organization and 2nd largest media company behind Disney.

And Lucas didn't just sell 1 character just as WB wouldn't lose just WW.

[WonderLight789]

It should be besides the point but this thread is clearly routed in you not liking DC's current WW output.

They're not breaking the law in regards to their legal ownership of WW at the moment.

Nobody knows the future. DC losing the rights can still happen.

[DochaDocha]

While true, George Lucas is 1 person. WB is an entire organization and 2nd largest media company behind Disney.

And Lucas didn't just sell 1 character just as WB wouldn't lose just WW.

Plus, Lucas was in his late 60s at the point of sale and clearly didn't have the energy to continue creating a new trilogy. On top of that, he got $4 billion out of the sale (of which, I feel compelled to remind, he generously donated half to philanthropy). Other than buying out parent companies, I can't think of many other scenarios where IPs change hands.