Jump to content


Entertainment Earth


Toggle shoutbox Squawkbox Open the Shoutbox in a popup

Please don't post Youtube videos in the chat box. The forums software auto embeds them. 

@  OrionPax44 : (25 August 2016 - 04:50 PM)

Is the main dance move him flashing you in beat with the music?

@  Broadside : (25 August 2016 - 04:50 PM)

http://i.imgur.com/qeoJpsf.jpg

@  TheMightyMol... : (25 August 2016 - 04:48 PM)

HEEEEEEEEEEY FOODSTAMP LAAADAAAY

@  Broadside : (25 August 2016 - 04:45 PM)

Oppa Homeless Style?

@  LV! : (25 August 2016 - 01:01 PM)

That guy had a perfectly nice home, he just didn't want the neighbors to see you with him.

@  TheMightyMol... : (25 August 2016 - 11:52 AM)

Did you at least buy him dinner?

@  Robowang : (25 August 2016 - 11:14 AM)

So I was making out with this random old homeless guy, and he stops and is all like "Why are you making out with me?" and I'm just like "Shut up, Homeless Guy."

@  Benbot : (25 August 2016 - 07:34 AM)

What?

@  MEDdMI : (25 August 2016 - 05:58 AM)

Aren't we the ones causing trouble for Kalidor?

@  LBD "Nyt... : (25 August 2016 - 12:17 AM)

Also, anyone know how to find the rest of how Kalidor got a kid in trouuuuuubleee?

@  LBD "Nyt... : (25 August 2016 - 12:11 AM)

@ TheMightyMol... : (24 August 2016 - 03:20 AM) Why do you hate yourself? -- I don't, really. Whether good or ill, I'd like to know how RG1 goes so, if nothing else, I can actually talk about it from a place of experience.

@  Verity Carlo : (24 August 2016 - 06:58 PM)

I've seen Minority Report, I don't want to read the same thing except with superheroes and also shit

@  Verity Carlo : (24 August 2016 - 06:57 PM)

You know, what I hate about Civil War II the most is that it's not even trying to break out of the Minority Report shaped hole it's in.

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 02:39 PM)

the debate sems to be over.

@  MEDdMI : (24 August 2016 - 02:37 PM)

Wouldn't it be easier to debate this in the comics subforum?

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 01:31 PM)

I don't have anything else to say (although I still think G2 is the true ending, even if G I Joe doesn't mention it, it seems G I Joe/G2 crossover isn't canon for G I Joe comics but only for the Transformers continuity)

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 01:29 PM)

ok whatever you won.

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 01:27 PM)

that's why I said "if", I dunno I didn't read G2 or G I Joe. 

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 01:26 PM)

Also,you're still basing this entirely on G2 matching a storyline that was part of G2 itself rather than whether or not G2 matches better with the G1 comic proper.

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 01:24 PM)

The idea kind of falls apart when it requires that the apocalyptic alien invasions had such little impact that everyone easily just ignored forever.

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 01:17 PM)

If some issues of G I Joe comics is a prelude to G2 and if there's nothing in the future G I Joe stories that condradicts San Francisco getting destroyed, yes I would say they share a continuity. 

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 01:02 PM)

If you're gonna go "we can assume it did happen even though it's never talked about as long as nothing specifically contradicts it", then surely it's just as easy to assume that the actual G1 TF and Joe crossover happened in the backstory of Classics and RG1.

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 01:02 PM)

also I refrained from mentioning Ask Vector Prime but but didn't it say RG1 is a splinter timeline?

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 12:58 PM)

has san francisco ever appeared in G I Joe stories that was chronologically set after G2?

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 12:55 PM)

Intent is not the same as result. And comics end up ignoring things quite often.

@  Telly : (24 August 2016 - 12:54 PM)

maybe they figured a lot of people that read gi joe also read transformers. so they throw a crossover/build up in their to get some excitement for the new comic coming

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 12:51 PM)

If G2 universe was to be unrelated to G I Joe, why did they do a prelude to it?

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 12:33 PM)

Classics and RG1 not including Joe issues 138-145 in their backstory does not preclude them from including TF 1-80, or even the Joe and TF miniseries.

@  TheMightyMol... : (24 August 2016 - 12:30 PM)

Marvel 616 is also a massive continuity snarl from dozens of writers altering, retconning, or ignoring each others' work for decades, so it's not really a great example for an argument on continuity.

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 12:29 PM)

Marvel 616 continuity is a shared universe, devastating events happens in individual series but does mean every event gets mentioned in other comics? @Notvery knightly, yeah that's why I edited that post.

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 12:27 PM)

Your proof for "TF universe = Joe universe" itself is the G2 lead-up, so your reasoning still goes back to G2 matching G2.

@  TheMightyMol... : (24 August 2016 - 12:25 PM)

So did GI Joe ever reference the time Bludgeon sent his entire force to rampage across the Earth? Or the time Jhiaxus blew San Francisco into a crater?

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 12:25 PM)

whatever.

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 12:22 PM)

Are you not seeing the recursiveness of "G2 is the true G1 sequel because G2 follows up on a G2 storyline"?

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 12:18 PM)

Yeah it has been established that Marvel Transformers and G I Joe comics takes place in the same universe. Unless 90s G I Joe was a reboot I'm pretty sure the G2 crossing over to a G I Joe comic that takes place in the very same universe as the original Transformers makes G2 the canon ending.

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 12:16 PM)

A crossover that the Joe comic apparently ignored.

@  Arazyr : (24 August 2016 - 12:15 PM)

They had a crossover before that, 1986. http://tfwiki.net/wi...he_Transformers

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 12:15 PM)

Did G.I. Joe acknowledge the planet getting wrecked by the Swarm? Because otherwise it's more like "Marvel Transformers is the same universe as Marvel G.I. Joe only when they feel like it".

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 12:11 PM)

You're using the G.I. Joe G2 prequel itself as the basis for "Marvel Transformers universe is the same universe as the Marvel G I Joe", which makes this a rather loopy argument.

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 12:07 PM)

As I said before, Marvel Transformers universe is the same universe as the Marvel G I Joe. Marvel G I Joe crossovers with G2, which makes G2 the canon ending. 

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 11:59 AM)

How is that relevant to whether or not RG1 (or Classics, even) takes place after issues 1 through 80 of Marvel TF proper?

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 11:51 AM)

it's a prequel to G2, which makes it the same universe as G2.

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 11:48 AM)

That's clearly not in G2 itself, seeing as it's G.I. Joe issue 138.

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 11:45 AM)

@NotVrtyKnightly Im talking about these issues. http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Unfoldings!

@  SHIELD Agent 47 : (24 August 2016 - 11:30 AM)

Now for my part, I consider Marvel G2/Alignment the "true" ending because of Simon Furman's involvement in it, its continuous narrative with Marvel G1, and its sequential publication.

@  SHIELD Agent 47 : (24 August 2016 - 11:28 AM)

The nature of multiple spinoffs/branching timelines means that to call any one spinoff the "true" ending is an arbitrary decision.

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 11:16 AM)

Joe doesn't take place "in G2". Even their Marvel TF-related history isn't confined entirely to a single publication from the 90s.

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 11:08 AM)

Look, oirignal Marvel Transformers takes place in the same universe as G I Joe and G I Joe takes place in the same universe as G2, which makes G2 the true canon ending.

@  NotVeryKnightly : (24 August 2016 - 11:07 AM)

And it's not like anyone would argue that Rebirth wasn't actually the fourth season of the Sunbow cartoon entirely based on the lack of Ramirez and Old Snake.

@  tffan01 : (24 August 2016 - 11:07 AM)

No you don't get it, I'm not saying RG1 is "less true" because G I Joe doesn't show up.


Photo

Marvel Demands $17,000 from Print Sales


66 replies to this topic

#1 Rust

Rust

    Slightly Off

  • Supporter
  • 39248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nebraska
  • Faction::Autobot

Posted 10 February 2012 - 08:58 AM

The Story

QUOTE
Recently, Marvel triumphed in court against Gary Friedrich, the creator of Ghost Rider, as to whether any moneys or rights were owed to him from the use of the characters in movies, with the second movie starring Nicolas Cage on its way.

And while the court decided that Marvel owe Gary nothing, they also decided on a counter claim from Marvel, that Gary Friedrich owes $17,000 for selling prints of the Ghost Rider character at conventions and the like.

This represents Gary?s earnings from selling such prints over several years ? but now Gary is penniless. And Marvel are demanding payment now. Oh, and that he is not allowed to say he is the creator of Ghost Rider for financial gain, say by doing an interview, in the future.

Marvel was recently bought by Disney for $4 billon. Nicolas Cage recently sold his copy of Action Comics #1 for over 2 million, and will have received similar for starring in Ghost Rider 2.

Gary Friedrich, the creator of Ghost Rider is, however, penniless.


I was going to see the new Ghost Rider movie, but now I think I'll skip it. This is a dick move on Marvel's part, no two ways about it, and sets a bad precedent for the future of the comic industry. No wonder nobody wants to create anything new - the company will just jack all the rights away from the creator and let a big middle finger fly for that person's efforts.

Numbers 24:17
lup_zps837154f7.jpg
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. Plato


#2 DeadPigmon

DeadPigmon
  • Supporter
  • 12338 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 February 2012 - 09:02 AM

so are they going to go beat up Jack Kirby's family now and steal all their possessions?

#3 The Predaking

The Predaking

    Warlord is amazing!

  • Supporter
  • 36386 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Despondos
  • Faction::Predacon

Posted 10 February 2012 - 09:29 AM

QUOTE(Rust @ Feb 10 2012, 07:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The Story

QUOTE
Recently, Marvel triumphed in court against Gary Friedrich, the creator of Ghost Rider, as to whether any moneys or rights were owed to him from the use of the characters in movies, with the second movie starring Nicolas Cage on its way.

And while the court decided that Marvel owe Gary nothing, they also decided on a counter claim from Marvel, that Gary Friedrich owes $17,000 for selling prints of the Ghost Rider character at conventions and the like.

This represents Gary?s earnings from selling such prints over several years ? but now Gary is penniless. And Marvel are demanding payment now. Oh, and that he is not allowed to say he is the creator of Ghost Rider for financial gain, say by doing an interview, in the future.

Marvel was recently bought by Disney for $4 billon. Nicolas Cage recently sold his copy of Action Comics #1 for over 2 million, and will have received similar for starring in Ghost Rider 2.

Gary Friedrich, the creator of Ghost Rider is, however, penniless.


I was going to see the new Ghost Rider movie, but now I think I'll skip it. This is a dick move on Marvel's part, no two ways about it, and sets a bad precedent for the future of the comic industry. No wonder nobody wants to create anything new - the company will just jack all the rights away from the creator and let a big middle finger fly for that person's efforts.



Just pirate it and send Gary Friedrich a check.

Restoring an Old Arcade Machine!

 

http://www.allspark....ade-game/page-2

 

 


#4 TrapDoor

TrapDoor

    Me and My Secretary Bird

  • Citizen
  • 3704 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Brunswick
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 10 February 2012 - 09:32 AM

You've got to be kidding me?! Of course he owes Marvel that money. How else is Marvel supposed to appease Galactus and keep him from devouring our planet?

#5 TrapDoor

TrapDoor

    Me and My Secretary Bird

  • Citizen
  • 3704 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Brunswick
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 10 February 2012 - 09:33 AM

Plus, this guy can just create more characters!! I'll even give him my original character, Toast Rider! (Old School sparkers might remember him.)

#6 PiratedTVPro

PiratedTVPro

    Quoth Akitsu, "NEVERMORE!"

  • Retired Staff
  • 14086 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Space Coast
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 10 February 2012 - 09:49 AM

You guys apparently don't understand how contract work - well - works... He knows he didn't own the character, but was trying to use a loophole that Marvel didn't file for a copyright when they character was created - which they don't legally have to do - in order to try and make some money. He didn't succeed, and Marvel is rightfully pissed at this waste of their time. That said, this agreement was made between Marvel and his attorneys, so he was involved somehow in the final decision.
Yep.

#7 Kevin S

Kevin S

    Unswerving in my duties

  • Supporter
  • 5408 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:I live in a Lake
  • Faction::Cannonball's Pirate Crew

Posted 10 February 2012 - 10:09 AM

QUOTE(PiratedTVPro @ Feb 10 2012, 09:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
You guys apparently don't understand how contract work - well - works... He knows he didn't own the character, but was trying to use a loophole that Marvel didn't file for a copyright when they character was created - which they don't legally have to do - in order to try and make some money. He didn't succeed, and Marvel is rightfully pissed at this waste of their time. That said, this agreement was made between Marvel and his attorneys, so he was involved somehow in the final decision.


Him not getting a piece of the movie, that doesn't bother me & is perfectly reasonable. Him being sued for $17,000 is the thing I don't agree with. It sets a bad precedent.

I mean, if I buy a Deviant Art of something like this, then does the artist own Cartoon Network, for any sales? I can't say that this Adventure Time photo is parody, just drawn in a different style.

Does this mean a Deviant Art owes a lot of properties, due to their sales?

Kevin

My FlickR folder...

And yes, I was too lazy to come up with a decent TF related forum name, and just *GASP* used my own.

#8 CORVUS

CORVUS

    Can you hear the thunder thatís breaking?

  • Supporter
  • 30620 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philadelphia, PA
  • Faction::Autobot

Posted 10 February 2012 - 10:20 AM

As Kevin S says, its a bad precedent. Many comic illustrators supplement their income at comic conventions and online via commissioned work and print sales. For over 30 years the companies have turned a blind-eye to this, knowing full-well that it was being done and taking no action, largely because these guys weren't exactly getting rich doing it.

This could have chilling effects on the entire practice, and could herald more action to come. Only time will tell, but this sure as hell leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.

Transformers is a brand that really has something for everyone. We are a darn lucky fandom.

 

card_grandmaximus.jpg


#9 PiratedTVPro

PiratedTVPro

    Quoth Akitsu, "NEVERMORE!"

  • Retired Staff
  • 14086 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Space Coast
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 10 February 2012 - 10:22 AM

QUOTE(Kevin S @ Feb 10 2012, 10:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Him not getting a piece of the movie, that doesn't bother me & is perfectly reasonable. Him being sued for $17,000 is the thing I don't agree with. It sets a bad precedent.

I mean, if I buy a Deviant Art of something like this, then does the artist own Cartoon Network, for any sales? I can't say that this Adventure Time photo is parody, just drawn in a different style.

Does this mean a Deviant Art owes a lot of properties, due to their sales?

Kevin


If it's being SOLF, then legally, yes. They would need to license the characters, like http://www.mondotees.com/ has begun doing for their posters. Otherwise, yes, Cartoon Network could take it down. Right now it's a big grey area where there's no way a company like Cartoon Network would be able to patrol the internet to take everything down, and they might not want to. A lot of people see this as free promotion, others don't, but it's all up to the rights holders.

In the settlement it specifically says that Marvel can't stop him from autographing Ghost Rider merchandise and charging for that. They don't own his autograph.
Yep.

#10 PiratedTVPro

PiratedTVPro

    Quoth Akitsu, "NEVERMORE!"

  • Retired Staff
  • 14086 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Space Coast
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 10 February 2012 - 10:26 AM

QUOTE(^0^CORVUS^o^ @ Feb 10 2012, 10:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
As Kevin S says, its a bad precedent. Many comic illustrators supplement their income at comic conventions and online via commissioned work and print sales. For over 30 years the companies have turned a blind-eye to this, knowing full-well that it was being done and taking no action, largely because these guys weren't exactly getting rich doing it.

This could have chilling effects on the entire practice, and could herald more action to come. Only time will tell, but this sure as hell leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.


The problem is that HE came after them, wanting money from the Ghost Rider movie(s) and the merchandise there-from. Marvel - or Marvel's lawyer team - is rightfully pissed off that they had to deal with it. Well, probably more that they had to spent time and money to deal with it. The guy was being an ass, trying to sue in order to get money for something he had no rights to, and now Marvel is digging in their heel.

You're right. Most companies - and even Marvel - most of the time will turn a blind eye on something like this. But when you come up and jive in their lawn, they're going to rub your nose in it so that others don't try to jive there too.
Yep.

#11 Shadewing

Shadewing

    Evil faces a Black Night

  • Supporter
  • 30797 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Nowhere.
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 10 February 2012 - 10:28 AM

QUOTE(PiratedTVPro @ Feb 10 2012, 09:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
You guys apparently don't understand how contract work - well - works... He knows he didn't own the character, but was trying to use a loophole that Marvel didn't file for a copyright when they character was created - which they don't legally have to do - in order to try and make some money. He didn't succeed, and Marvel is rightfully pissed at this waste of their time. That said, this agreement was made between Marvel and his attorneys, so he was involved somehow in the final decision.


Also if you want to get technical, which the law loves to do, he DIDN'T create Ghost Rider. Marvel already owned a character by the name of Ghost Rider. A non-super powered, Wild West Hero by the name Carter Slade that wore a white suit to look like he's a ghost. The character was Homaged in the first Ghost Rider movie in the form of the Caretaker. They share nothing in common, and the Wild West version is now refereed to as Phantom Rider after the flaming skull biker version became famous.

3DS Friend Code: 0387-9040-3532

 

Twitch Channel

 

Youtube Replays

 

VOTE for what I play on 8/30!

 

Friday: Sonic Generations - Sunday: Transformers WFC - Tuesday: Little Inferno


#12 PiratedTVPro

PiratedTVPro

    Quoth Akitsu, "NEVERMORE!"

  • Retired Staff
  • 14086 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Space Coast
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 10 February 2012 - 10:31 AM

QUOTE(Database @ Feb 10 2012, 10:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Also if you want to get technical, which the law loves to do, he DIDN'T create Ghost Rider.


He didn't create it no matter how you look at it because he was working for Marvel at the time. I don't own any of the advertising work I did while at Cramer Krasselt, even though it was entirely my ideas, my work, my talent and my vision that led to the advertising. They're pretty explicit about that even in my contract at an advertising agency. I'd imagine - especially with all the lawsuits that they've dealt with over the past twenty years - that Marvel's contracts are pretty ironclad.
Yep.

#13 Chris McFeely

Chris McFeely

    That was then, this is now.

  • Citizen
  • 7931 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 February 2012 - 10:46 AM

More to the point, Friedrich was selling reproductions of Marvel artwork of Ghost Rider at conventions without permission - that is to say, committing copyright infringement. Marvel counter-sued him for that, and $17000 is getting off pretty light for what he was doing for as long as he was. I admit that, given it's Disney, the fee seems rather punitive and there's a nasty feeling like he's being made an example of, and I DO feel bad for him - but he was incontrovertibly in the wrong, and HE was the one who initiated the proceedings while a) having absolutely no legal leg to stand on, and b) being guilty of copyright infringement. He wilfully poked the bear, and got exactly what anyone would expect. After all the recent legal kerfuffles with Seigel and Shuster's and Kirby's estates (which all ended with it being proven that the rights to the characters were legally owned by the companies either by purchasing them outright from the creators or due to their creaiton as work for hire) and Alan Moore's Watchmen pontifications in the last week, there's a reflexive desire to rally behind him and go "Oh, poor wittle bwoke creator got smacked down by da evil corporation!" - especially since this is one man and the original creator and not his money-grubbing descendants - but this is a situation entirely of his own making.

Edited by Chris McFeely, 10 February 2012 - 10:59 AM.


#14 Scavgraphics

Scavgraphics

    Sometimes bad ponies make the best good ponies!

  • Supporter
  • 6353 posts
  • Faction::Equestrian

Posted 10 February 2012 - 11:19 AM

QUOTE(PiratedTVPro @ Feb 10 2012, 11:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE(Database @ Feb 10 2012, 10:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Also if you want to get technical, which the law loves to do, he DIDN'T create Ghost Rider.


He didn't create it no matter how you look at it because he was working for Marvel at the time.


No..he didn't own it because it was work for hire, but he'd still be the creator.

It's the ownership, not the creatorship, that was in question (I think...I seem to remember something hinky in the who actually did the creation aspect of the case).


For more on this topic, Bleeding Cool has a second article where someone tries to blackmail Nic Cage into paying off Friedrich.

#15 skankerzero

skankerzero

    Back in Austin!!

  • Citizen
  • 7379 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austin, TX
  • Faction::Autobot

Posted 10 February 2012 - 11:27 AM

Also, depending on how your contract is worded, companies can also own anything you create at home on your spare time.

There's a big stink in the game industry over contracts like that.

I don't own any of the characters I've created from scratch for any of the games I've made. It doesn't stop me from saying that I made them, but I'm not dumb enough to try and make money off them either.
-----------
jesse sosa
owner / creative director
Dinosaur Games
studio art director
Samsung

#16 PiratedTVPro

PiratedTVPro

    Quoth Akitsu, "NEVERMORE!"

  • Retired Staff
  • 14086 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Space Coast
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 10 February 2012 - 11:53 AM

QUOTE(skankerzero @ Feb 10 2012, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Also, depending on how your contract is worded, companies can also own anything you create at home on your spare time.


Yeah, that was how the CK contracts were structured. Also, according to the contract I'm not allowed to work at another advertising firm for 5 years after leaving them.
Yep.

#17 skankerzero

skankerzero

    Back in Austin!!

  • Citizen
  • 7379 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austin, TX
  • Faction::Autobot

Posted 10 February 2012 - 12:33 PM

QUOTE(PiratedTVPro @ Feb 10 2012, 10:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE(skankerzero @ Feb 10 2012, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Also, depending on how your contract is worded, companies can also own anything you create at home on your spare time.


Yeah, that was how the CK contracts were structured. Also, according to the contract I'm not allowed to work at another advertising firm for 5 years after leaving them.

ouch! >_o

we usually have a year that we can't work on a competing product. It's just to keep you from taking company information with you and giving it to them.

Still though, no one really pays attention to that.
-----------
jesse sosa
owner / creative director
Dinosaur Games
studio art director
Samsung

#18 Cheetimus Primal

Cheetimus Primal

    Commissions! cheetimus@cheetimus.com

  • Retired Staff
  • 48309 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sacramento
  • Faction::RIBFIR

Posted 10 February 2012 - 12:43 PM

QUOTE(PiratedTVPro @ Feb 10 2012, 10:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE(^0^CORVUS^o^ @ Feb 10 2012, 10:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
As Kevin S says, its a bad precedent. Many comic illustrators supplement their income at comic conventions and online via commissioned work and print sales. For over 30 years the companies have turned a blind-eye to this, knowing full-well that it was being done and taking no action, largely because these guys weren't exactly getting rich doing it.

This could have chilling effects on the entire practice, and could herald more action to come. Only time will tell, but this sure as hell leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.


The problem is that HE came after them, wanting money from the Ghost Rider movie(s) and the merchandise there-from. Marvel - or Marvel's lawyer team - is rightfully pissed off that they had to deal with it. Well, probably more that they had to spent time and money to deal with it. The guy was being an ass, trying to sue in order to get money for something he had no rights to, and now Marvel is digging in their heel.

You're right. Most companies - and even Marvel - most of the time will turn a blind eye on something like this. But when you come up and jive in their lawn, they're going to rub your nose in it so that others don't try to jive there too.

Yeah, we get it. marvel was being petty and trying to prove a point.
However no amount of reasoning will get to me be ok with a huge corporation ruining some guy's life just to prove a point.
24674394486_13a96b16e0_o.jpg

#19 Shadewing

Shadewing

    Evil faces a Black Night

  • Supporter
  • 30797 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Nowhere.
  • Faction::Free Agent

Posted 10 February 2012 - 01:03 PM

QUOTE(Cheetimus Primal @ Feb 10 2012, 12:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE(PiratedTVPro @ Feb 10 2012, 10:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE(^0^CORVUS^o^ @ Feb 10 2012, 10:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
As Kevin S says, its a bad precedent. Many comic illustrators supplement their income at comic conventions and online via commissioned work and print sales. For over 30 years the companies have turned a blind-eye to this, knowing full-well that it was being done and taking no action, largely because these guys weren't exactly getting rich doing it.

This could have chilling effects on the entire practice, and could herald more action to come. Only time will tell, but this sure as hell leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.


The problem is that HE came after them, wanting money from the Ghost Rider movie(s) and the merchandise there-from. Marvel - or Marvel's lawyer team - is rightfully pissed off that they had to deal with it. Well, probably more that they had to spent time and money to deal with it. The guy was being an ass, trying to sue in order to get money for something he had no rights to, and now Marvel is digging in their heel.

You're right. Most companies - and even Marvel - most of the time will turn a blind eye on something like this. But when you come up and jive in their lawn, they're going to rub your nose in it so that others don't try to jive there too.

Yeah, we get it. marvel was being petty and trying to prove a point.
However no amount of reasoning will get to me be ok with a huge corporation ruining some guy's life just to prove a point.


When someone pokes a bear with a stick while trying to get it's honey; you shouldn't feel sorry for the guy when he ends up in a pinewood box.

3DS Friend Code: 0387-9040-3532

 

Twitch Channel

 

Youtube Replays

 

VOTE for what I play on 8/30!

 

Friday: Sonic Generations - Sunday: Transformers WFC - Tuesday: Little Inferno


#20 Random Items

Random Items

    Just this once, everybody lives!

  • Staff
  • 10438 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary, AB - Canada

Posted 10 February 2012 - 01:20 PM

QUOTE(Database @ Feb 10 2012, 11:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
When someone pokes a bear with a stick while trying to get it's honey; you shouldn't feel sorry for the guy when he ends up in a pinewood box.


For that analogy to be fair, we'd have to be talking about a "someone" who made the honey for the bear in the first place.
 photo 1446489_1420344741314_full_zps63gobam0.jpg



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users