Sat Jan 9, 2010 10:34AM10 comments ›
Sat Jan 9, 2010 — by Mike Gold
Marvel Comics Sues Jack Kirby!
What goes around, comes around
Yeah, I know. Jack’s long-gone. That doesn’t mean he can’t
be sued – or, at least, his estate. To be fair, Jack started it.
A whole bunch of copyrights expire between 2014 and 2019, and Kirby’s estate sent notices saying those copyrights will revert to from the House That Jack Built to Jack’s actual house.
These copyrights pretty much include everything Jack ever touched at Marvel: Amazing Adventures, Amazing Fantasy, Amazing Spider-Man, Avengers, Fantastic Four, The Incredible Hulk, Journey into Mystery, Rawhide Kid, Sgt. Fury and His Howling Commandos, Strange Tales, Tales to Astonish, Tales of Suspense and The X-Men.
This action follows similar claims made by Jerry Siegel (Superman), Marty Nodell (Green Lantern) and Joe Simon (Captain America). All have met with some degree of success for the litigants.
Marvel, of course, claims all this stuff was created as work-for-hire and therefore belongs to Marvel. Or, actually, now, Disney. “It is a standard claim predictably made by comic book companies to deprive artists, writers, and other talent of all rights in their work,” according to Kirby’s attorney Marc Toberoff. “The Kirby children intend to vigorously defend against Marvel’s claims in the hope of finally vindicating their father’s work… Sadly, Jack died without proper compensation, credit or recognition for his lasting creative contributions.”
In the world of litigation, Newtonian physics reigns supreme. Marvel lawyer John Turitzin said in a statement that the heirs were trying “to rewrite the history of Kirby’s relationship with Marvel,” adding “Everything about Kirby’s relationship with Marvel shows that his contributions were works made for hire and that all the copyright interests in them belong to Marvel.” He then sought a court ruling that the Kirby notices have no effect.
Marvel is now owned by Disney, and Disney’s got more hard-ass lawyers than Harvard graduated in 200 years. If the Kirby estate were to win, the $4,000,000,000.00 Disney just spent for Marvel goes up in smoke. Expect a big bloody fight – or an amusing settlement.
Quotes courtesy of the Associated Press.
Jump to comments (10) 
More News from ComicMix
- John Callahan: 1951-2010about an hour ago, 0 comments
- DC Comics celebrates its 75th, and you can win prizes-- if you can stump our expert7 hours ago, 13 comments
- The Point Radio: Tim Matheson Meets 'Thor' and 'Green Lantern'8 hours ago, 0 comments
- 'Legend of the Guardians' One-Sheet Unveiled12 hours ago, 0 comments
- Review: 'Sherlock', The New Kid On The Block3 days ago, 0 comments
- Review: 'Ouran High School Host Club'3 days ago, 4 comments
- Review: 'James and the Giant Peach'3 days ago, 0 comments
- #SDCC: Marvel Studios: 'Thor' & 'Captain America: The First Avenger' complete panel for viewing3 days ago, 0 comments
- 'Green Lantern' Teaser One-Sheets4 days ago, 0 comments
- #SDCC: The Black Panel 20104 days ago, 0 comments
Comments (10)
John Judy (11:04 AM on Sat Jan 9, 2010)
The Kirby lawyers better rustle up the ultimate nullifier quick because Galactus and Sons, Attorneys at Law are gonna be knocking soon. Best of luck to the Kirbys.
Michael Davis (7:02 PM on Sat Jan 9, 2010)
John,
The smart play is not to try and win in court, the play would be to garner public opinion VERY loudly. Rather or not America cares about these 'funny book' superheroes is unsure but, the comic book creative community is not the little bitch we once were. One of the reasons Disney courted Michael Ovitz who left the MEGA POWERFUL C.A.A. talent agency he founded to become President of Disney was because Ovitz's reach into the talent pool in Hollywood was massive.
Also, it never looks good for a giant corporation to go after a family. I expect Disney will write a check and be done with this, until I sue them over Mickey Mouse...that was my idea...once...in a dream.
Mike Gold (9:56 AM on Sun Jan 10, 2010)
Michael, I've never seen you hang out with females that flat-chested.
Tony Isabella (11:51 AM on Sat Jan 9, 2010)
This is where I pop in to again remain fans that just because a publisher claims something was work-for-hire doesn't automatically make it so...not even when there's a contract involved.
Delmo Walters Jr. (4:24 PM on Sat Jan 9, 2010)
When did Kirby co-create Spider-Man? Wasn't that Lee & Ditko?
mike weber (9:51 AM on Sun Jan 10, 2010)
According to some sources, he had a hand in the design, as well as (as noted) doing the cover for that first story.
Mike Gold (9:55 AM on Sun Jan 10, 2010)
Lotsa stories, including one in Joe Simon's book. That's not a Kirby design. It's pretty damn typical Ditko stuff, as properly expanded and mitigated by Lee. We'll probably never know: Stan's memory is for shit, Steve ain't talking (in public), and Jack's at The Source.
Mike Gold (5:30 PM on Sat Jan 9, 2010)
Yeah. Well, I think that's a problem as well. But for the record, it was Jack who drew the cover to Amazing Fantasy 15 after somebody (Stan? Martin Goodman?) rejected Ditko's original version -- which has been oft reprinted.
Jason M. Bryant (12:46 AM on Mon Jan 11, 2010)
Drawing a cover is about as "work for hire" as it gets. He didn't change the costume or any other signature elements. Even what's happening is pretty much the same, he just framed it better. It's a great cover and better than the original, but nothing that affects who has rights to the character.
Arachnid Adventures (7:24 PM on Sun Jan 17, 2010)
Stan Lee originally assigned Jack Kirby to draw Spider-Man's first appearance in Amazing Fantasy but, when he saw the artwork, didn't like the way Kirby handled it, so he gave it to Ditko to draw instead. As a result, Kirby always claimed to have had a hand in creating Spider-Man, even though his version of the character bore no resemblance to what was eventually unleashed on the world. I think Kirby's version got his powers from a magic ring, wore a cape and carried some form of gun.