Superman = Capt. Marvel Jr.?

[gentlesatirist]

Can someone explain to me how DC wasn't able to immediately sue the pants off Fawcett when looking at Supes vs. Cap Jr.?

I mean, you had the whole invulnerability, flight, strength thing with Cap...then Fawcett rolls out a younger version in a costume almost identical to the Man of Steel's! Blue spandex/red cape!

But the lawsuit still wasn't resolved for more than a decade.

Sometimes it takes a long time for us to notice the obvious...


- FE
Wickliffe OH

[Cei-U!]

Maybe Fawcett should've sued DC for ripping off Junior with a new character called Superboy. :D

Cei-U!
On Earth-Three maybe!!!

[dr_cyclops]

There are so many differences in the DC and Fawcett characters. Very important differences. To my understanding, DC never won a lawsuit against Fawcett. Ten years of lawsuits can give you such a pain in the neck. The Fawcett fans didn't like it either, so when DC decided to purchase the characters and publish "Shazam" in the 70s, old fans didn't want to buy their favorite hero published by "Dr. Silvanna and the evil Superman company". I guess it didn't matter that the original team came back to do it. Great comics, sad story. Fans and their company loyalty.

[gentlesatirist]

...why didn't DC go after Timely/Marvel/Atlas in the 40s because of the original Angel - a blue-suited, red-caped flying superhero? Because the Angel had a mustache and Superman was clean-shaven?


- FE

[TheHistorian]

More likely because he didn't have his own title and wasn't a major cover feature.

[InfoBroker]

Which Superman do you want to talk about, the one that flies or the one that just leaps? And when it comes to comparing costumes, which Superman costume is being used? He was still shifting his "distinctive lickness" in the timeframe when CMjr made his debut in Whiz comics in 1941.

Lawsuits are expensive, copyrights and trademarks and their infringment are difficult to define, enforce or prove.

NPP had leveraged infringment on others before the Captain Marvel trials. A few were bullied off the market without ever going to court.

The NPP/Fawcett lawsuit was long and expensive, and NPP didn't pursue it until it was clear that the Captain Marvel comics were outselling the Supeman family. The lawsuit impacted the profits of both companies. Fawcett threw in the towel, not because anything had been proven by DC, but because Fawcett was tired of dumping money and retiring lawyers to Florida, all amidst the declining sales of comics as a whole. TO them, it wasn't worth it to continue the battle.

Ironic then that in 1972, when DC was getting ready to publish SHAZAM!, several interviews with Carmine Infantino mentioned how Captain Marvel was nothing like Superman.

Times change, and the goals shift...

- jb the ib :cool:

[hondobrode]

Totally correct Info Broker. Fawcett gave up dumping money. DC bullied and intimidated Fawcett because they were bigger and had deeper pockets. It has been clearly established that the two characters have more differences than similarities. It's sad in a way but kind of good in the fact that at least the Cap character is still alive tho not exactly the way he was as he has been modified to fit into the DCU whereas the original version had his own universe and later had Earth-S in the pre-Crisis DCU.

I'm looking forward to the Jeff Smith mini to eventually come out. His version looks pretty true to The Big Red Cheese's roots.

Interestingly enough, the reason I looked at this thread was I thought it was going to ask the difference between Grant Morrison's All-Star Superman and the fact that it was earlier rumored that since Grant and his three buddies, Tom Peyer, Mark Millar & Mark Waid, IIRC, had wanted to revamp Supes in a major way but DC didn't want to jettison the continuity, so they gave him literally free reign to work his craziness on Cappy Jr. I have heard nothing of that happening now that the All-Star project is on the table.

[gentlesatirist]

...Fox's Wonder Man in 1939, then backed off until battling Cap? When did the DC/Fawcett lawsuit start?

DC - apparently bankrolled by Superman money - must have cowed most others from directly imitating their meal ticket. I get the impression from reading Jules Feiffer's great 1960s essay - The Great Comic Book Heroes - that what DC defended was the origin story - "rocketed from outer space" and that whole deal. This then led competitiors to give their heroes powers via magic amulets, chemical potions, robot suits, etc.


- FE

[Mike Kuypers]

...Fox's Wonder Man in 1939, then backed off until battling Cap? When did the DC/Fawcett lawsuit start?

1941, according to Don Markstein (http://toonopedia.com/capmarv1.htm).

[crankyoldman]

I have actually heard it both ways: that Fawcett just decided the lawsuit wasn't worth the hassle with sales declining and settled out of court, and also that DC definitively won the case.

It seems to me that Cap is clearly modeled on Superman. Back in 1939, superheroes were fairly new (antecedent characters in pulps generally lacked the flamboyant costumes and fantastic powers of the new bunch), and here comes a dark-haired, squinty-eyed, square-jawed muscleman with brightly-colored tights and a cape (but no gloves or mask), performing very similar superhuman feats to those of the brand-spanking-new Superman himself, in the same format, for the same audience. If I were Superman's publishers or creators, I would have found the similarities too close for comfort.

That's not to say that Cap is an inferior rip-off. From what I've seen, Cap was clearly better drawn. Some folks even think that the stories were more imaginative, though with my slender knowledge of golden age comics I'll have to pass judgment on that. And the background twist (the Billy Batson alter ego) was pretty original, not to mention probably more appealing to the target audience than Superman's own backstory.

In fact, I'm not necessarily saying Cap is a rip-off at all. Nearly all comics superheroes are at least indirectly derivative of Superman. How close must an imitation be to infringe on the original's property rights? That's a legal issue and one that doesn't seem to me to be self-evident. Spider-Man wears red & blue tights, exhibits super-strength, has a nerdy (and originally bespectacled) alter ego, and works for a newspaper. Is he a rip-off of Superman? Just where do you draw the line?

I'm not saying either that Cap was or was not a violation of DC's rights. To me it's a gray area and can either be condemned for the similarities or vindicated for his original qualities, while repeating the mantra "you can't copyright an idea".

Btw, has DC stopped shutting down imitators in court? They took care of Wonderman and Cap, and as recently as 1959 supposedly threatened Archie Comics over Private Strong. And there's a theory that some of the idiosyncracies of Marvel's silver age characters were motivated by a desire to avoid legal problems of the sort that Fawcett faced. But they apparently didn't bat an eye over Alan Moore's Supreme run, which was a pretty obvious analog to Weisinger-era Superman stories. Has the idea become so generic now that they don't bother claiming infringement? Or do they not bother with comics imitators because their real business is now the vast merchandising empire that Superman generates? Or did Moore just get lucky? Again, where is the line to be drawn?

[gentlesatirist]

...DC is all that concerned anymore, unless it's a Superman parody showing the character to be a drug user or serial killer or something equally abhorrent.

There's really no way anymore - with comics being almost a niche market - for a character to eat into their comic sales. Even if a blatant Superman clone had a successful TV cartoon, I doubt it would catch on in merchandising since it would be recognized as just that - a Superman ripoff.


- FE

[Cei-U!]

Don't forget that animation studio head Paul Terry was forced to change his star character's name from Supermouse to Mighty Mouse after DC's lawyers got wind of the tough little squeaker.

Cei-U!
Here I come to save the day!

[dr_cyclops]

I think the "Bratpack" and "Maximortal" twists on DC's characters show just how much will be tolerated. Superman is comming up on 75 years old and subject to "Public Domain". If Time-Warner and Disney have their way, laws will be changed.
Back to the golden-age, as I understand it: DC was not without it's rights, Wonderman was work for hire, Capt. Marvel was artist creation, sold to company. When the creators took the stand and confirmed that they created this character and sold it to Fawcett. (Nor did they believe he is not a rip-off of Superman.) DC lost the case, only to appeal it, again and again. How do you copyright the circus strong-man? These trully were, different times. Cartoon and Comic fandom should remember that the roots of the art-forms, is the old traveling "Circus".

[gentlesatirist]

...the Wizard, a Golden Age character from Archie ancestor MLJ, also had the Superman color scheme - blue tights/red trunks and cape - with vague mental powers, but no super-strength or flight. Also had a mustache, an "I'm not Superman" trick first used by Marvel/Timely's original Angel character.


- FE

[gentlesatirist]

...Captain Battle, published by Lev Gleason Publications (Daredevil vs. the Claw, Crime Does Not Pay) also was a sartorial clone of Superman, although he later ditched the red cape.

I'm terrible at the image-scanning game, but if anyone would like to scan images of Superman, Capt. Marvel Jr., the (golden age) Angel, the (golden age) Wizard and Capt. Battle for comparison purposes, it might prove educational. Particularly since I think they were all cover-featured on newsstands at the same time (1940-41).


- FE

[dr_cyclops]

I'm pretty good with scanning images, unfortunatly I don't have images of these characters to scan.
My information is based on alot of fan-talk over the years. I can't quote anything because I can't remember where I heard it. Therefore, anything I say here is just an opinion, based on this "hear-say". This is why I try to use terms, "As I understand". If I'm wrong on anything, Please let me know. It wouldn't be the first time.