DC gives Neal Adams recognition; Adam puts down Marvel.

Ice

Teh Sexy Monkey Queen
Joined
Jul 24, 2004
Messages
43,800
Location
The World of Icelandia.
Read it right here.


The higher-ups at Marvel are more messed up than I read before.


1. Marvel does not provide royalties past 5 years after an artist (or writer) dies. So, for example, Jack Kirby’s family no longer receives royalties for Jack’s massive work for Marvel Comics. In stark contrast, D.C. Comics has no such policy and though Jack did far less work for D.C. Comics, royalties are regularly paid to Jack Kirby’s family and will continue.
2. Marvel insists the terms of their contracts be kept secret from others. No such repressive tactics exist at D.C.
3. These checks, for Batman, not only to Neal, of course, stand out in sharp contrast to the case of Dave Cockrum at Marvel who clearly and admittedly created 5 X-Men characters but is only being paid royalties for one.

Neal reminds us that he created Havok and Sauron and has never seen a dime in royalties.
 

Ice

Teh Sexy Monkey Queen
Joined
Jul 24, 2004
Messages
43,800
Location
The World of Icelandia.
nigma said:
thats just funny
It's just really screwed up how the higher-ups at Marvel work. I mean, they also have never paid Lei Wein, the creator of Wolverine, a dime either.

Someone on the chat last night had said if they did, they'd had to give him half of what they receive! :lol:
 

E

Moderator
Excelsior Club
Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
33,346
Location
MI
Eh. If you don't like the terms, don't sign the contract.
 

ourchair

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
13,105
Location
Philippines
UltimateE said:
Eh. If you don't like the terms, don't sign the contract.
Was gonna say the same thing.

Marvel may or may not be paying good royalties, but I think trying to demand royalties/renegotiate the terms of a contract you signed years ago after one of your creations take off is just whiney-*** bellyaching and moaning.

I believe Will Eisner had a very assessment of situations like this, saying that that's just "the way things were done". If people really wanted creative ownership, control and royalties they should ASK or LOOK for it, and not expect it to be offered to them, then suddenly make a pissy fit about it NOT being given to them TWENTY years after the fact.

It's like, "Hey! Remember that $100 I lent you for some stock investements TWENTY years ago? You know, on that Apple company? I want TEN PERCENT or I'm going to have my lawyers gang-rape you for all you're worth."
 

compound

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2005
Messages
2,772
Location
Metro Manila, Philippines
Actually, it's great P.R., particularly when a respected creator stirs up controversy around a character nobody gives two ****s about.

Perfect example: earlier this year, novelist Jonathan Lethem (Men and Cartoons; Gun, With Occasional Music; Fortress of Solitude) expressed interest in re-inventing Omega the Unknown for Marvel.

http://www.newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32944

Yeah, I know, you're probably thinking 'who?'

As Paul O' Brien put it: "The marketability of Lethem's OMEGA relaunch - or rather, such marketability as it has - comes from Lethem's credibility rather than from a built-in audience for the character itself. "

http://www.ninthart.com/display.php?article=1058

But then creator Steve Gerber pitched a fit about it, so all of a sudden, fanboys were taking notice of a de facto vanity project that would otherwise have been overlooked in the direct market, alongside the rest of Marvel's token cosmic fodder, like the (surprisingly entertaining) Drax the Destroyer miniseries or last year's under-appreciated, kid-friendly Guardians.

If I didn't know any better, I'd say that Gerber's compaints were part of a deliberate marketing effort by Marvel to get the book noticed.
 
Last edited:

Ice

Teh Sexy Monkey Queen
Joined
Jul 24, 2004
Messages
43,800
Location
The World of Icelandia.
ourchair said:
Marvel may or may not be paying good royalties, but I think trying to demand royalties/renegotiate the terms of a contract you signed years ago after one of your creations take off is just whiney-*** bellyaching and moaning.."
It has nothing to do with whining or demanding royalties. It was just saying how the things are done at Marvel, which really is a shame. Doubt they were even told all the terms of their contract before.
 

E

Moderator
Excelsior Club
Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
33,346
Location
MI
ourchair said:
Marvel may or may not be paying good royalties, but I think trying to demand royalties/renegotiate the terms of a contract you signed years ago after one of your creations take off is just whiney-*** bellyaching and moaning.

My thoughts exactly.

I'm not saying it doesn't suck, but if that's what he agreed to, that's what he agreed to. It would be a different story if they were screwing him out of royalties.

Speaking of which, wasn't there a big lawsuit regarding royalties between DC and the creators of Superman just recently? I seem to remember that...
 

Ice

Teh Sexy Monkey Queen
Joined
Jul 24, 2004
Messages
43,800
Location
The World of Icelandia.
UltimateE said:
I'm not saying it doesn't suck, but if that's what he agreed to, that's what he agreed to. It would be a different story if they were screwing him out of royalties.
Which I think was the case.

UltimateE said:
Speaking of which, wasn't there a big lawsuit regarding royalties between DC and the creators of Superman just recently? I seem to remember that...
I think I remember that, too. Which shows that even DC has screwed up people, too.
 

moonmaster

Without him, all of you would be lost souls roamin
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
13,670
UltimateE said:
My thoughts exactly.

I'm not saying it doesn't suck, but if that's what he agreed to, that's what he agreed to. It would be a different story if they were screwing him out of royalties.

Speaking of which, wasn't there a big lawsuit regarding royalties between DC and the creators of Superman just recently? I seem to remember that...
Well, from what I know, Seigal and Shuster sold Superman to DC for $400 when they were teenagers and for a long time were not allowed royalties from the character. In the 70s (a few years before the movie was to be released) Neal Adams spearheaded a movement to get them the rights (By the 70s, they were both in desperate need of money). They got their royalties and made an assload of cash.
 

E

Moderator
Excelsior Club
Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
33,346
Location
MI
icemastertron said:
Which I think was the case.

No - there's a huge difference between not getting royalties because it wasn't part of your contract, and not getting royalties because the company is keeping them from you.

No one is getting screwed out of royalties from Marvel.
 

Ice

Teh Sexy Monkey Queen
Joined
Jul 24, 2004
Messages
43,800
Location
The World of Icelandia.
UltimateE said:
No - there's a huge difference between not getting royalties because it wasn't part of your contract, and not getting royalties because the company is keeping them from you.

No one is getting screwed out of royalties from Marvel.
Alright, if you say so. I said I think, wasn't sure.
 

E

Moderator
Excelsior Club
Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
33,346
Location
MI
icemastertron said:
Alright, if you say so. I said I think, wasn't sure.

To be more specific, I should say that at least according to this statement by Neal Adams, no one is getting screwed out of royalties from Marvel. But that's different than him thinking their royalty policy should be changed, you see what I'm saying? He is griping about the policy, not that it is enforced incorrectly.
 

ourchair

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
13,105
Location
Philippines
UltimateE said:
He is griping about the policy, not that it is enforced incorrectly.
Exactly.

I think its nice that DC extended this gesture to Adams, and it would be better if more publishers made the initiative to acknowledge the talents that made their properties what they are.

Ice, what E is saying is that Marvel's inability to do the same isn't the same thing as screwing. Screwing implies betrayal of a policy that was there. If Todd McFarlane's contract with Marvel said he was entitled to royalties and Marvel was refusing to pay those royalties, then THAT'S screwing around.

icemastertron said:
Doubt they were even told all the terms of their contract before.
I think its a mistake for us to assume that Marvel is holding legal information and terms-of-work from their talent. You could be right, but that also means that what they'd be doing isn't just unfair to creators, it's AGAINST THE LAW.
 

Latest posts

Top