When Spawn #9 came out in early 1993, it sported a cover price of $1.95. Right now at Mile High Comics, you can order a near mint copy for only a little bit more than that. But clearly, the contents of that installment are much more valuable than the physical comic itself.
That issue, guest written by Neil Gaiman, introduced Angela and Medieval Spawn, and induced a years-long maelstrom of legal battles between Gaiman and Spawn creator Todd McFarlane over the question of ownership. Back in 2002, a jury found that Gaiman was co-owner of Angela and Medieval Spawn — the Associated Press wrote a tidy recap of the situation, if you can get past that intro.
The latest development came late last week, as Judge Barbara Crabb ruled that McFarlane owes Gaiman for profits from Dark Ages Spawn, Tiffany and Domina — three characters ruled to be “derivative” of Gaiman’s creations. The ruling, available in PDF form over at The Beat, is surprisingly colorful, and shows that Crabb really dove into the legal back issue bin in rendering her decision:
“Tiffany and Domina are visually similar to Angela and share her same basic traits.
All three are warrior angels with voluptuous physiques, long hair and mask-like eye makeup.
All three wear battle uniforms consisting of thong bikinis, garters, wide weapon belts, elbow-
length gloves and ill-fitting armor bras.”
“If defendant really wanted to differentiate the new Hellspawn, why not make him a
Portuguese explorer in the 16th century; an officer of the Royal Navy in the 18th century, an
idealistic recruit of Simon Bolivar in the 19th century, a companion of Odysseus on his
voyages, a Roman gladiator, a younger brother of Emperor Nakamikado in the early 18th
century, a Spanish conquistador, an aristocrat in the Qing dynasty, an American Indian
warrior or a member of the court of Queen Elizabeth I?”
Neil Gaiman has a blog up on the situation here. UPDATE: Todd McFarlane has addressed the situation on his Twitter.
August 2nd, 2010 at 5:29 am
Actually, Spawn #9 introduced Angela, not Tiffany. Tiffany is the derivative character the new lawsuit was dealing with.
August 2nd, 2010 at 5:32 am
Sorry. That came off kind of jerky-sounding. Clearly it was just a typo, as Angela is mentioned right after it.
August 2nd, 2010 at 5:32 am
loving the depth of research the judge did.
August 2nd, 2010 at 6:37 am
I think the judge just gave McFarlane a whole bunch of new ideas for future Spawns!
August 2nd, 2010 at 6:38 am
If you read the full testof what she said, wow she really did do her research. Kudos.
August 2nd, 2010 at 6:49 am
Judge Barbara Crabb proves she’s a better writer than whoever’s been writing Spawn for the last 140 issues.
August 2nd, 2010 at 7:19 am
There’s no mention of Cogliostro, so I have to wonder if McFarlane was smart enough not to make a derivative version of him.
August 2nd, 2010 at 8:25 am
wow. her ruling got into the conceptual mechanics of the Spawn-universe in a way that would make most fanboys weep on how good it was. her comparison of Medieval Spawn vs. Dark Ages Spawn ranks up there with post-COIE continuity conflicts.
great stuff.
August 2nd, 2010 at 8:32 am
If your doing work for someone else property and you create a character you get co-ownership of that character? Should Mcfarlane have made Gaiman agree that all work in the book is owned by him? Can Gaiman real do anything with these characters now that he is co-owner?
August 2nd, 2010 at 8:42 am
@comicfan
It was part of the Image policy at the time that creators get ownership of the characters they created and that use of that/those character(s) would get the creator the proper and deserved residuals. Essentially, while Gaiman can’t do anything with those characters outside of the Spawn-product, he is entitled to moneys from toys, spin-offs, cartoons, and movie representations of those characters. McFarlane essentially tried to side-step those obligations with “Dark Ages” Spawn.
August 2nd, 2010 at 9:05 am
Todd McFarlane should hire the judge.
August 2nd, 2010 at 9:39 am
Just think, if McFarlane had honored the agreement that he made initially with Gaiman, we would be denied this most entertaining ruling…
August 2nd, 2010 at 10:08 am
Wow, McFarlane just got seriously owned (pun intended) by Judge and Gaiman. The only argument of co-ownership left to have is whether Gaiman in a few years will owe Crabb on co-ownership of Todd. Pemberton’s comment is the truth. If the judge is a newbie to comics she just brought a serious “know your own history” hammer down on Sir Todd. The Spawn Bible was the nail in the coffin – the 400 years device left him no arguable position. She stopped short of calling it purposeful. She did a great job of break down the mythos.
I gotta say, this could be a landmark moment. This ruling could be intepreted several ways…many of them should make Marvel, Image and DC Comic’s sphincter slam shut. How many ways has Superman, Batman and other characters have been templates for other characters – you could certainly argue derivation up and down the lineups. Other “inspired” characters could now be under the microscope.
August 2nd, 2010 at 10:13 am
zjeffries Says:
August 2nd, 2010 at 6:37 am
I think the judge just gave McFarlane a whole bunch of new ideas for future Spawns!
The sad thing is that TM probably will use those ideas and then get sued by the judge. The guy couldn’t come up with an original idea if his life depended on it. Still waiting on the issue where Dr. Strange, ghost Rider, Venom and Mystique come back to collect the gear that Spawn borrowed…. I imagine he sat there with a body-part spin wheel and a copy of Marvel Universe and just added parts together as they came up.
August 2nd, 2010 at 10:39 am
Pemberton, the judge is a better writer than David Hine?
DAVID HINE?
take your head out of your ass.
August 2nd, 2010 at 11:24 am
@darkjared
Ghost Rider? Oh, I get it- cause Spawn and Ghost Rider both have chains…You’re really stretching it dude.
August 2nd, 2010 at 11:43 am
Yo Darth_Board — thanks for looking out, but unless I’m going nuts the only time I mentioned Tiffany in the post was in reference to her being ruled a derivative character. If I missed something, let me know! Thanks again.
August 2nd, 2010 at 12:45 pm
I’ve only read A few issues of Spawn over the years. I remember 1, 8, and 50. Reading all of this knd of makes me want to go back and reread some of these books. I remember cllecting some of the early figures and enjoyed what they were doing with those at the time. I might have to go back and look at those as well.
I used to like McFarlands style on Hulk and Spiderman. Couldn’t aford the Image books when they were coming out and also read Marvel.
Perhaps things can continue to move forward from this point on and there won’t be too many hard feelings. Breech of contract is a terrble thing. I’ve always appreciated gaimon as a literary tallent and mcFarland as a business man and artist. I wish them both continued success in the future.
August 2nd, 2010 at 1:00 pm
“If your doing work for someone else property and you create a character you get co-ownership of that character?”
Yes, if you’re a freelancer (which most comic book writers and artists are in the US) and you don’t specifically sign a contract to the contrary. If you’re the writer -and- artist, then you get sole ownership. Marvel and DC expect folks working on their universe books to sign a “work for hire” agreement, which means that in the eyes of the law, the publisher, not the writer or artist, is the creator of the material.
August 2nd, 2010 at 1:14 pm
@darkjared
Don’t forget Prowler.
August 3rd, 2010 at 1:37 am
I have a question. If McFarlene is paying royalties to Gaiman for the profits made on Dark Ages Spawn because that character is “derivative” of Medieval Spawn, does that mean that Gaimen has to pay royalties on those royalites back to Todd since Medieval Spawn is based on McFarlene’s orignal Spawn? The whole thing seems rather silly to me.
August 3rd, 2010 at 8:22 am
Alan Moore better watch out since most of his “Creations” are derivative of other archetypes
August 3rd, 2010 at 9:22 am
@Coming Curse – The issue is that the characters were created for the “Spawn” series and the rights given to Todd as a barter for some other rights that Gaiman and McFarlane jointly owned. As I recall, Gaiman wrote a couple of issues of Spawn and created some characters in exchange for Todd’s share of the rights, but McFarlane reneged and continued to claim ownership of the other things. I think that’s what originated the suit, and not the Spawn characters themselves.
August 3rd, 2010 at 9:25 am
@coming curses
I believe Dark Ages Spawn/Medieval Spawn and derivatives from originals falls under the precedences established with the original Supergirl disputes.