Comments on: Linkarama@Newsarama http://blog.newsarama.com/2011/03/28/linkaramanewsarama-344/ The Blog@ Team and prominent comics personalities share what’s on their minds. Fri, 24 May 2013 17:32:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1 By: Paul http://blog.newsarama.com/2011/03/28/linkaramanewsarama-344/comment-page-1/#comment-609604 Paul Mon, 28 Mar 2011 22:53:05 +0000 http://blog.newsarama.com/?p=23503#comment-609604 Pretty much every A-list actor was offered and turned down Superman, a lot of them including Warren Beatty have talked about it in interviews (Beatty sent his secretary out to buy longjohns, looked at himself in a full-length mirror and dismissed the offer because of how silly he looked). The Salkinds needed a star, any star, to satisfy their backers (as Ilya said, "Charles Bronson could have played an ashtray, they didn't care!"), but when they locked in Brando and Hackman that left the door open for an unknown to play Superman himself. Pretty much every A-list actor was offered and turned down Superman, a lot of them including Warren Beatty have talked about it in interviews (Beatty sent his secretary out to buy longjohns, looked at himself in a full-length mirror and dismissed the offer because of how silly he looked). The Salkinds needed a star, any star, to satisfy their backers (as Ilya said, “Charles Bronson could have played an ashtray, they didn’t care!”), but when they locked in Brando and Hackman that left the door open for an unknown to play Superman himself.

]]> By: Vinnie Bartilucci http://blog.newsarama.com/2011/03/28/linkaramanewsarama-344/comment-page-1/#comment-609395 Vinnie Bartilucci Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:53:17 +0000 http://blog.newsarama.com/?p=23503#comment-609395 I'm going to come off as a heartless clod, but I'm sticking with my opinion. Joanne and the kids weren't interested in recognition for Jerry and Joe (they got that back in 1977), they're interested in the money. There is nothing wrong with that - for the amount that DC/WB have made off the characters, any reasonable amount would still be a drop in the bucket. And the issue was made worse by the dickish moves they made towards the pair over the years. I maintain this is and has always been a money issue, and ownership of the copyright is merely means to the end of more money. WB could have and SHOULD have made friends with Jerry and Joe years ago. The pensions they gave them were paltry compared to the profits made, and it's because of that Joanne kept (as I understand it) pressing Jerry to keep suing for more, time and time again. WB fears that if they make/made a good deal with J&J, other creators would come out of the woodwork. DC and Marvel (and their requisite parent companies) both have to realize that they each have one special case which cannot be duplicated: DC has J&J, and marvel have Kirby. Both are sinigularly responsible for the lion's share of more profits for said company than any one else. Both are cases unique and dissimilar to any other creators. Making sizable and unique settlements with their estates will not create a precedent, simply because there are no other creators even close to their respective situations. J&J's case over copyright is valid; Jack's is not. Both were brought forth because the respective companies stonewalled both parties repeatedly over the decades in ways that were perfectly correct, legally, but abhorrent morally. So the majority of fans FEEL they are due what the parties claim, even though legally they may not be. These cases make the companies look far worse than the plaintiffs. But in all honesty, how many sales have they lost as a result of them? Are there that many people who have sworn off comics because of these actions? Indeed, are there any? I'm betting more people stopped buying Marvel over One More Day than over this. These cases should have been settled a LONG time ago, certainly before the current films made the properties an order of magnitude more valuable. They weren't. So I fear it's already cost DC/WB a great deal more thna any settlement could have. They are going to be hobbled by the loss of those copyrights. I said it before, and I'm going to keep saying it - Pay them off and make them go away. Get clear, unarguable title. It's the only safe way to go. I’m going to come off as a heartless clod, but I’m sticking with my opinion. Joanne and the kids weren’t interested in recognition for Jerry and Joe (they got that back in 1977), they’re interested in the money. There is nothing wrong with that – for the amount that DC/WB have made off the characters, any reasonable amount would still be a drop in the bucket. And the issue was made worse by the dickish moves they made towards the pair over the years.

I maintain this is and has always been a money issue, and ownership of the copyright is merely means to the end of more money.

WB could have and SHOULD have made friends with Jerry and Joe years ago. The pensions they gave them were paltry compared to the profits made, and it’s because of that Joanne kept (as I understand it) pressing Jerry to keep suing for more, time and time again.

WB fears that if they make/made a good deal with J&J, other creators would come out of the woodwork. DC and Marvel (and their requisite parent companies) both have to realize that they each have one special case which cannot be duplicated: DC has J&J, and marvel have Kirby. Both are sinigularly responsible for the lion’s share of more profits for said company than any one else. Both are cases unique and dissimilar to any other creators. Making sizable and unique settlements with their estates will not create a precedent, simply because there are no other creators even close to their respective situations.

J&J’s case over copyright is valid; Jack’s is not. Both were brought forth because the respective companies stonewalled both parties repeatedly over the decades in ways that were perfectly correct, legally, but abhorrent morally. So the majority of fans FEEL they are due what the parties claim, even though legally they may not be.

These cases make the companies look far worse than the plaintiffs. But in all honesty, how many sales have they lost as a result of them? Are there that many people who have sworn off comics because of these actions? Indeed, are there any? I’m betting more people stopped buying Marvel over One More Day than over this.

These cases should have been settled a LONG time ago, certainly before the current films made the properties an order of magnitude more valuable. They weren’t. So I fear it’s already cost DC/WB a great deal more thna any settlement could have. They are going to be hobbled by the loss of those copyrights.

I said it before, and I’m going to keep saying it – Pay them off and make them go away. Get clear, unarguable title. It’s the only safe way to go.

]]>