Mon Jan 5, 2009 10:12PM5 comments ›
Mon Jan 5, 2009 — by Glenn Hauman
ComicMix QuickPicks - January 5, 2009
Today's installment of comic-related news items that wouldn't generate a post of their own, but may be of interest...
* Missed this one in the holiday wackiness: A federal appeals panel said that child pornography is illegal even if the pictures are drawn, affirming the nation's first conviction under a 2003 federal law against such cartoons. Even though there are no actual children involved. So Dwight Whorley of Richmond is serving 20 years in prison on an anime charge, even though he could just be in jail on the photographs. Time to donate to the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund...
* Washington, D.C., library officials have proposed a ban on sleeping at public libraries. Our solution? More graphic novels! No one will sleep through those thrill-packed extravagnz-- oops. Too much Stan Lee there.
* Recession? How can there be a recession when you can pre-order Captain Kirk's chair for $2200 retail?
* That's Sir Terry Pratchett to you, buddy.
Anything else? Consider this an open thread.
Jump to comments (5) 
More News from ComicMix
- Review: 'Justice League the Complete Series'10 hours ago, 0 comments
- The Point Radio: Life on the set of 'Law & Order'1 day ago, 0 comments
- Review: 'Two Girls and a Guy' on Blu-ray1 day ago, 0 comments
- Add ComicMix to Twitter lists and get entered to win a free graphic novel!1 day ago, 0 comments
- 'Kick-Ass' posters revealed1 day ago, 0 comments
- J.J. Abrams takes on the Micronauts1 day ago, 1 comment
- Remember, remember, the fifth of November, and the inspiration for 'V For Vendetta'3 days ago, 1 comment
- Review: 'Zorro' The Complete First and Second Seasons3 days ago, 3 comments
- Crazy Sexy Geeks: Celebrity Wonder Woman Debate!3 days ago, 1 comment
- Happy 20th anniversary, Wallace and Gromit!3 days ago, 0 comments
Comments (5)
ed zarger (11:11 PM on Mon Jan 5, 2009)
Anyone cover MAFCO Litigation Trust -- Distribution of Settlement Proceeds?
This was litigation coming about as part of the bankruptcy reorganization plan for Marvel Entertainment Group, from 1998 and actions before.
See http://www.mafcosettlement.com, if you want to wade through the details. Be warned -- some of the pdfs are very large, if you're on dial-up.
Speaking NOT as a lawyer, it seems that there were some sizable profits to Mr. Perelman's companies from bonds paid with Marvel money, in the years before Marvel went bankrupt. This repays some of that.
My check was dated DEC 24.
Maybe this is Mr. Perelman's version of an economic stimulus check, or A Brand New Day.
Glenn Hauman (2:12 AM on Tue Jan 6, 2009)
Not that I've seen yet. What was your check covering? What were you owed for?
ed zarger (11:15 PM on Tue Jan 6, 2009)
I bought stock in Marvel when they went public, under Perelman's control. The payout from the litigation was for shareholders, in my case.
According to the information, in 1996 Marvel filed for bankruptcy protection.
Marvel started this litigation action in 1997 as part of the reorganization. It asserted that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties in 1993 and 1994 when certain companies that held a majority of Marvel stock, and these companies indirectly owned by MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, issued three "tranches" of notes.The defendants allegedly used their positions in Marvel to obtain benefits from the notes which were not shared with Marvel or the other shareholders. (That mostly from the "Notice to Shareholders" pdf at the mentioned web -site.)
Not sure that this says much more for most people than that I don't know the particulars myself.
Glenn Hauman (11:24 PM on Tue Jan 6, 2009)
I've been reading through the documentation and trying to figure out who's owed for what, since it's not well spelled out. There are customers listed, a few Marvel lower-level execs like former VP of Sales Matt Ragone, and so on... I suppose a few of those Marvel execs were probably stockholders at some level.
ed zarger (9:00 AM on Wed Jan 7, 2009)
I doubt you'll find many familiar names. I think I read that the list of stockholders was as of 1998, which is 2 years into bankruptcy. I'd think people closer to the company would have had a better idea that the bankruptcy was coming, and that they'd have sold what they had for at least a little cash before it came.