Stan Lee Media sues Marvel

Glenn Hauman

Glenn is VP of Production at ComicMix. He has written Star Trek and X-Men stories and worked for DC Comics, Simon & Schuster, Random House, arrogant/MGMS and Apple Comics. He's also what happens when a Young Turk of publishing gets old.

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. DFU says:

    Here is the latest. On July 9, 2007, Stan Lee and POW! were sued in Federal District Court in Los Angeles for bankruptcy fraud. Here is a scan of the cover sheet of the filing –

    • Mike Gold says:

      Whereas we are aware of the filing, we are attempting to gather more information from sources better than — and in our opinion, less prejudiced than — Free Republic.

      • DFU says:

        What a lame comment, Mike. I provided you information directly from the complaint. I made no conservative vs liberal spin. By all means, go do what I did. Read the 100+ pages of the complaint and exhibits. Spend many hours at the bankruptcy court reading the files. Speak to the Trustee if she will speak with you. This is a report on the filing of a lawsuit. How does referencing it on FreeRepublic without political commentary make it prejudiced? Because you would rather shoot off your mouth instead of doing some investigating, here are a few things you need to know. In 2002, Stan signed a court-approved agreement to remove properties for development from the BK free and clear of debt. He signed on behalf of SLC LLC. Do the search to confirm if you like, but I will tell you that SLC LLC was never formed by him. Go prove me wrong. There are recorded documents (part of the exhibits) showing a transfer of the assets a few months prior to the BK dismissal, which was late in 2006. It was signed by the debtor in possession in favor of another insider, and the assets went to QED, a subsidiary of POW!. It would cost you over $20,000 to have all the documents copied from this bankruptcy. I'll save you the time and expense. Nowhere in the entire BK will you find any authority given or agreement signed allowing the assets to be transferred to QED. The judge didn't know about it. The Trustee didn't know about it. And the creditors didn't know about it. Whether the first report of this filing was made on FreeRepublic doesn't matter. You will be seeing this from a mainstream media reporter within a few days. Mr. Lee and his associates have some explaining to do. In the $5 billion dollar suit against Marvel, both he and Marvel have some explaining to do about the contract signed by Lee with SLM in October 1998 and the nearly identical one signed by Lee with Marvel a month later.

  2. Mike Gold says:

    I wasn't attacking you, DFU. I was telling you our thought process ("our" meaning Glenn Hauman and me) when we decided not to go with the story solely based upon the comments in FreeRepublic.Here's a clue: if you're doing a story about somebody suing Stan Lee and you tie that story into Bill Clinton at the very beginning, you're probably carrying around a political agenda. And, yes, I'd feel exactly the same way if I heard the same story on, say, Air America and they set up a connection to Dick Cheney.But…FAR more important…ALL of your comments come from the complaint. That's ONE side of the argument. Only one. In our judicial system, we attempt to let defendants answer complaints. Then the whole thing goes to court. Or not, depending upon legal mechanics. What you are reporting is not fact, it's just the complaint. When you say various parties knew nothing of Stan's activities, what you are saying may not be accurate or may not be the whole story. I have no doubt Stan's lawyers have another point of view and will make that known at the proscribed time.That doesn't mean Stan Lee is innocent of the charges in this civil suit. It means Stan Lee gets his turn at bat. It's the American way.Or at least it used to be before assholes like FreeRepublic started putting dictators in office.

  3. Dan Davis says:

    Whew. I was worried there for a minute, but it looks like Christmas was saved!