Comic numbering

E

Moderator
Excelsior Club
Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
33,346
Location
MI
Just wondering...is anyone aware of the legal obligations (if any) of a periodical publisher to keep a given periodical numbered chronologically and correctly?

I think legally they are required to keep the publishing info that is (usually) found within the first couple of pages at the bottom of a page which gives the publisher's address, publishing info, etc.

I would assume that logically that would extend to the volume and issue numbering. But I can't seem to find anything to back that up.

The thing that got me thinking about this is the recent renumbering of one of the Deadpool series so they can reach #900. But it also extends to other books in regards to folding a book reboot back into volume 1 numbering, as was done in Hulk, Amazing Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, etc. (in other words, do they do that as some sort of legal requirement, and if so, how can they change the number of the Deadpool series?).
 
Just wondering...is anyone aware of the legal obligations (if any) of a periodical publisher to keep a given periodical numbered chronologically and correctly?

I think legally they are required to keep the publishing info that is (usually) found within the first couple of pages at the bottom of a page which gives the publisher's address, publishing info, etc.

I would assume that logically that would extend to the volume and issue numbering. But I can't seem to find anything to back that up.

The thing that got me thinking about this is the recent renumbering of one of the Deadpool series so they can reach #900. But it also extends to other books in regards to folding a book reboot back into volume 1 numbering, as was done in Hulk, Amazing Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, etc. (in other words, do they do that as some sort of legal requirement, and if so, how can they change the number of the Deadpool series?).

The Deadpool series is suppose to be a parody on their own re-numbering by starting with 900 and going backwards. Like the next issue is 899, 898, and so on. So that someday there will be 900 issues.
 
You're asking if they're legally required to revert back to the original numbering at some point?
Or in other words is it against the law for the number on the cover to misrepresent the actual number of issues there have been?

That sounds reasonable and I have no idea, but if I had to guess, I'd say no.

The Teen Titans vol 1 lasted 53 issues
The New Teen Titans vol 1 lasted 40 issues, was changed to Tales of the New Teen Titans with issue 41 and then continued until issue 91
The New Teen Titans vol 2 started when vol 1 changed it's name and ran for 49 issues, changed it's name to The New Titans and continued until issue 130
There have also been Teen Titans Volumes 2 and 3, Titans volumes 1 and 2, etc etc

and the numbers have never reverted back to the original numbering.

Green Lantern has also had four volumes that have all been numbered separately.

I think Marvel just has longevity envy.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I doubt there are any laws in place that mandate any sort of regulations about issue numbering. There are too many volume changes/special situations for it to really be an issue. And it feels like a kind of pedantic issue for the government to be enforcing.

The Invisibles did the backwards numbering gimmick before DPTU and I doubt it's the first.
 
Last edited:
You're asking if they're legally required to revert back to the original numbering at some point?

No...I'm wondering if they are legally required to maintain proper issue number sequencing. I doubt that the instances of reverting back to original numbering have anything to do with that.

Personally, I doubt there are any laws in place that mandate any sort of regulations about issue numbering. There are too many volume changes/special situations for it to really be an issue. And it feels like a kind of pedantic issue for the government to be enforcing.

The government has proven a number of times that they will regulate things that don't seem to need regulation.

And volume changes don't really have any baring on it because every time they start a new volume of something they go back to #1.

I guess the question becomes this: if publishers are required to display publishing info within the first few pages (and especially considering the kind of info displayed there), what's the point of requiring that if order isn't maintained?
 
Looking at the publishing information found on the bottom of the re-cap page of last weeks Guardians of the Galaxy #23, wich is a Vol. 2 scenario simply states that the issue is just number #23 not taking into account the previous volume, it does however say it is the April 2010 issue for some reason, and it doesn't even say it is Vol. 2.

Inversely Incredible Hulk #602 from last November just said it was #602, wich is a series that added up the numbers of a number of different series with Math that doesn't really add up

Marvel being a major corparation would not dick around with something like that if there was major legality problems attached, as the rest of the publishing information has a good deal of standard boiler-plate ass covering stuff.

Given that information I believe the company is only required to list the publishing information relevant for an order form, just having to say the title of the book and the number on the cover followed by said boiler-plate-ass-covering
 

Latest posts

Back
Top