Fables is now public domain

[MRP]

Its an award winning brand. Studios do it all the time. Hello Percy Jackson. WB has owned DC for ages and could've done it.

Again, reality check. Award winning brand in a niche market with a circulation under 100K per issue (or per volume of the trade if you want to look at that instead) doesn't have the same cache as a book franchise that sells millions of copies per release, and isn't going to put asses in the seats or get people to tune in to watch in sufficient numbers to justify the expense of a license. Percy Jackson vs, some other teen kid fighting Greek gods will have an impact on the bottom line. Bigby Wolf instead of Big B.Wolf interacting with Snow White and Cinderalla won't.

And what awards? Eisners? Harveys? Ringos? Consumers who aren't hardcore comic fans won't even know what those awards are let alone what they mean, and they won't have any cache on the box office or ratings. And you'r enot likely to get a suit or a bean counter to pay for that when it doesn't improve ROI.

-M

[Primal Slayer]

Again, reality check. Award winning brand in a niche market with a circulation under 100K per issue (or per volume of the trade if you want to look at that instead) doesn't have the same cache as a book franchise that sells millions of copies per release, and isn't going to put asses in the seats or get people to tune in to watch in sufficient numbers to justify the expense of a license. Percy Jackson vs, some other teen kid fighting Greek gods will have an impact on the bottom line. Bigby Wolf instead of Big B.Wolf interacting with Snow White and Cinderalla won't.

And what awards? Eisners? Harveys? Ringos? Consumers who aren't hardcore comic fans won't even know what those awards are let alone what they mean, and they won't have any cache on the box office or ratings. And you'r enot likely to get a suit or a bean counter to pay for that when it doesn't improve ROI.

-M

Rrality check, eisners and all that stuff means something. They want the story that comes with it. You can't justify Percy Jackson no which way while trying to put down Fables lol. Some kid fighting Greek Gods...groundbreaking. fairy-tales have proven to be successful.

Oh we also have The Walking Dead which is JUST LIKE Fables lol. Yet someone bought the rights about a world with Zombies. Wow.

[marhawkman]

A very quick trademark search reveals there are 6 active trademarks for Fables in various fields. I didn't do an in depth search to see who holds those trademarks r what fields, but it can be trademarked for use in particular fields. DC/WB may be one of those holders for use in comics, books, media, etc. I am not sure. So whoever is going to attempt to use it needs to do their due diligence, a mistake will result in a cease and desist and probably some very hefty court costs if you try to fight it. And not having the resources to fight Warner/DC in court is one of the reasons Willingham cited for this move. Just because something possibly could be done, the logistics and affordability of doing it can be a non-starter.

-M

Well, to look at it another way, the fact there are already SIX shows that making a new one is still possible despite existence of older ones.

[MRP]

Rrality check, eisners and all that stuff means something. They want the story that comes with it. You can't justify Percy Jackson no which way while trying to put down Fables lol. Some kid fighting Greek Gods...groundbreaking. fairy-tales have proven to be successful.

Oh we also have The Walking Dead which is JUST LIKE Fables lol. Yet someone bought the rights about a world with Zombies. Wow.

The characters of Percy Jackson and Walking Dead aren't accessible without the license. The characters of Fables are since they are all public domain characters. Here's the proof in the pudding. At the time Fables was at the peak of its success, not one, but two television properties were launched based on fairly tales and folklore (Once Upon a Time and Grimm) and neither decided it was worth their while in terms of ROI to license the successful brand of Fables to help their ratings. In a quick buck copycat world that Hollywood is, if there was value in that brand someone would have moved on it at that time. No one did, because the brand wouldn't add value to projects of that type. You can get access to the stories, characters, and everything else about Fables except the brand, without paying licensing fees for it and the brand wasn't going to move the needle. Walking Dead, Percy Jackson, etc. are apples to Fables oranges, because the story and many of the characters (while the Greek Gods are public domain, Percy and much of his supporting cast are not) are not legally accessible without the license. Walking Dead wasn't a brand until the show hit the airwaves, and a large percentage of its audience had no clue it was based on a comic book, award-winning or not. It was optioned because story and character development were available with the option. The story and character development of Fables were available without the license, hence no one going after that license and instead making shows using those types of stories and characters without it. You can through would of/should of hypotheticals all you want, the reality is studios passed on the license because it didn't have value to them because it brought nothing to the table they didn't already have for free.

-M

[Primal Slayer]

The characters of Percy Jackson and Walking Dead aren't accessible without the license. The characters of Fables are since they are all public domain characters. Here's the proof in the pudding. At the time Fables was at the peak of its success, not one, but two television properties were launched based on fairly tales and folklore (Once Upon a Time and Grimm) and neither decided it was worth their while in terms of ROI to license the successful brand of Fables to help their ratings. In a quick buck copycat world that Hollywood is, if there was value in that brand someone would have moved on it at that time. No one did, because the brand wouldn't add value to projects of that type. You can get access to the stories, characters, and everything else about Fables except the brand, without paying licensing fees for it and the brand wasn't going to move the needle. Walking Dead, Percy Jackson, etc. are apples to Fables oranges, because the story and many of the characters (while the Greek Gods are public domain, Percy and much of his supporting cast are not) are not legally accessible without the license. Walking Dead wasn't a brand until the show hit the airwaves, and a large percentage of its audience had no clue it was based on a comic book, award-winning or not. It was optioned because story and character development were available with the option. The story and character development of Fables were available without the license, hence no one going after that license and instead making shows using those types of stories and characters without it. You can through would of/should of hypotheticals all you want, the reality is studios passed on the license because it didn't have value to them because it brought nothing to the table they didn't already have for free.

-M

They're still generic storylines and a comic book that wasn't selling millions just as you claimed as part of a reason why no one would buy fables. You buy Percy, TWD for the stories within. Anyone can do a zombie show about survivors. The versions of characters within Fables cant be done without owning fables. Just as you cant do The Little Mermaid with a red head Mermaid named Ariel. You can't do Dorothy w/ruby slippers.

As the creator pointed out, nothing has been done to bring his property beyond the comic. WB lets plenty of properties age on the shelf. The Boys was owned by DC for a time. And even though its huge, WB sits on Crime Syndicate. WB sitting on Fables is no different than if Disney sat on TLM, Cinderella, etc...

[Frontier]

Yeah, people dish out new works spinning off or playing with Fairy Tales all the time, they're popular becuase of the quality of the story, writing, and characters, which Fables has.

Look at how popular The Wolf Among Us was for similar reasons, even though it seems like Willingham didn't care for it himself.

[Donald]

The characters of Fables are since they are all public domain characters.

Not a lawyer, but I played one in a saucy puppet show once.

The characters they're taken from are public domain, but the Fables characters aren't (weren't). Before this, anyone could use the Big Bad Wolf, but they couldn't use Bigby Wolf - reverse werewolf who is the sheriff of a town of storybook characters. Anyone could use a Wizard of Oz flying monkey, but not Buffkin the librarian. Same with Ambrose Flycatcher, Frau Totenkinder and so on.

Anyway, DC is saying Willingham can't do that and they own everything.http://https://icv2.com/articles/new...ill-willingham

[HsssH]

Yeah, people dish out new works spinning off or playing with Fairy Tales all the time, they're popular becuase of the quality of the story, writing, and characters, which Fables has.

Look at how popular The Wolf Among Us was for similar reasons, even though it seems like Willingham didn't care for it himself.

Yeah, if license is worthless then why itbwas used for Wolf Among Us game?

[Vakanai]

Anyway, DC is saying Willingham can't do that and they own everything.http://https://icv2.com/articles/new...ill-willingham

Bad link? I keep getting "Hmm. We’re having trouble finding that site." when I click on it.

[Digifiend]

Why would someone have paid for a Fables license when you can do the same thing wit fairy tale characters just without the brand? Let's be real for a second and understand the nature of the business-I love Fables, but the brand wasn't going to bring in an increase of audience large enough to justify the additional expense of a license.


-M

Of course Once Upon a Time uses characters from the Disney Animated Canon. Most of those movies are based on fairy tales and other public domain works, just like Fables is. As such, anyone adapting Fables now would probably be accused of ripping off OUAT, so yeah, you're right, it's unlikely to happen.

[charliehustle415]

Bad link? I keep getting "Hmm. We’re having trouble finding that site." when I click on it.

https://www.thewrap.com/dc-comics-wi...-domain-claim/


what a clusterfuck no wonder DC has been in shambles lately.

honoring compacts no longer mean anything and writers and artists get screwed because they can't afford the fight.

People who are/were up in arms about Finger, Ditko and the rest not being recognized should be up in arms about this.

A creator is telling you he is being screwed and this is his only recourse; if it works who knows, but **** DC execs

[HsssH]

I have seen some progressive people on twitter basically saying that its ok for him to get screwed because he is far right politically.

[charliehustle415]

I have seen some progressive people on twitter basically saying that its ok for him to get screwed because he is far right politically.

jesus.

i swear to the gods that people have completely lost the plot.

don't they realize this type of behavior affects everyone including their favorite liberal blue haired author as well.

[mr_crisp]

That's pretty good. Lots of empty gaps that could be filled.

[sbp1972]

I’m no lawyer, but I wonder if Willingham in going public like this isn’t actually helping DC in any potential legal case. They can show with his public statements that he is trying to undermine their legal rights to the specific versions of the characters.