Marvel suing estates of artists for control of characters

[clearspira]

The rules concerning a work for hire is clear and isn't some ''reinvention'' of the law.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

"The Law is the Word and the Word is the Law"-Teenage Caveman

[Frustration]

The law is the law. Rules are rules. A contract is a contract.And I find it interesting that when Scarlett Johanssen uses ''I want what i'm owed because I have a contract'' everyone defends her. But when Disney does it...

To my knowledge, Scarlett Johanssen has never tried to deny anyone payment they were contractually obligated.

Disney, on the other hand...

It's worth noting that I've sworn off all Disney products, permanently, because of their argument that they purchased assets but not liabilities (!) when the contracts involved clearly indicated that ownership of books included the obligation to pay royalties to the people who wrote them. Their argument, if taken seriously, would require trashing the entire system of contract law, to the point that every person I approached about the issue insisted that I had to be getting their claims wrong until I provided proof. (I can't blame them - such a ludicrous argument sounds like something that got garbled in transmission and is mistaken.)

Between that, and trying to silence people looking for their rightful royalties BEFORE opening discussion... everyone is trying to profit, but how it's done is what matters, and Disney has crossed a line.

[Riedquat]

The law is the law. Rules are rules. A contract is a contract.

I didn't know that The Auditors posted on this forum.

I hope Marvel loses, and loses hard, but in a broader legal context, I'm concerned that these lawsuits represent a trend of moving creative writes and copyright concepts away from individual creators who live and die to functionally immortal corporate hegemonies and franchises.

Unless there's something more to this than immediately meets the eye (which there could well be) I'm not sure what the problem people have with Marvel on this is - just want the big company to loose because they're the big bad business?

IANAL, but if it is work for hire then that's no different from what many of us do in our jobs every day, whether it's a Marvel character or the tedious technical specification of widget design no. 31251. If you pay someone to do something for you, whether it's paint a picture or build an extension, you'd be a bit miffed if they demanded a share if you then sold it, no?

Where I suppose it might be different is if they created the characters originally in their own time and said Marvel can use those characters but not actually own them, which I suppose may well have happened.