CBR: EXCLUSIVE: Marvel's Buckley & Quesada Speak On Gary Friedrich & Ghost Rider

[CBR News]

After news that "Ghost Rider" writer Gary Friedrich will owe Marvel Comics $17,000 stirred the comics community, Dan Buckley and Joe Quesada explain the publisher's point of view in regard to the case and convention sketches.


Full article here.

[mietha]

That was really a whole lot of nothing. They didn't state anything we didn't already know, nor did they actually speak to what he was doing (selling T-shirts, prints, etc. not licensed by Marvel). I suppose they did ok sketches of Marvel characters but, then again, that is not their decision. That would be up to Disney's legal department. It sounded good, and was a decent attempt at positive spin, but it cleared up absolutely nothing.

[Another Aaron]

That Editor's note at the end leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

I don't care about current litigation - there will ALWAYS be litigation. They'll never be able to comment on the question.

The comic book industry was founded by shady con men. They ripped off everyone they could. Fair, no one knew how big these characters would get one day and I'm willing to give allowance for that.

Still.

Marvel & DC treat their creators like strippers - sure, you can make a living while you have your looks, but God help you the day you get wrinkles. You'll die in an alley, uninsured, while the next generation of Disney execs are snorting coke off framed Spider-Man issues YOU drew.

[hutchimus]

Everything those two said in that interview was cleared by the relevant legal departments. You can count on that.

[Chad Anderson]

Thanks for asking that follow-up.

That's the real crux of the matter for me: Would it hurt Marvel to initiate a program similar to DC's where creators from the past get some income from properties they helped create whenever those characters are exploited in other media? I don't think it would, and whatever the company's legal obligations might be, it would be the right thing to do.

Hope Marvel considers it.

[Genki Sudo]

That was really a whole lot of nothing. They didn't state anything we didn't already know, nor did they actually speak to what he was doing (selling T-shirts, prints, etc. not licensed by Marvel). I suppose they did ok sketches of Marvel characters but, then again, that is not their decision. That would be up to Disney's legal department. It sounded good, and was a decent attempt at positive spin, but it cleared up absolutely nothing.

He was selling signed Ghost Rider books that he owned already

[sephiroth61787]

Everything those two said in that interview was cleared by the relevant legal departments. You can count on that.

Absolutely.

At least the issue of convention sketches can be put to rest.

I hope Gary gets the help he needs. Whether he was wrong or not, he shouldn't have to struggle to pay the bills.

[adeathinthefamily]

I will never ever side with a corporate giant that has made its millions by perpetuating and re-imagining and re-sexifying the characters that other people created, characters which, in their essence, necessarily reflect (at least in some small way) the personality, psyche or experiences of these creative individuals. That goes for Disney as a whole just as much as it does Marvel really. It's madness.

The law's a bitch.

[Nick Pitarra]

At least the issue of convention sketches can be put to rest.

Not exactly. It doesn't state anything about financial gain/money exchanged for any of those things(sketches/signatures)....which is the concern and issue at hand (for most artists). Which leaves it up to interpretation.

I think its the same as its always been, just don't start mass producing things that compete with Marvel and/or draw things that damage their brand.

[Brandon Yates]

"What has been misinterpreted as a settlement is a court document that Gary's very own attorneys agreed to, along with Marvel's attorneys. That document basically ends his lawsuit against Marvel at the trial court level with Marvel having won and Gary's case dismissed. By agreeing on a number for the profits Gary made from selling unlicensed Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider merchandise after the court has decided that Marvel is the owner of that copyright, it allows Gary's attorneys to file his appeal now rather than have Gary litigate further."


But, if I'm understanding correctly, it is a fine/punishment if the appeal ultimately fails, isn't it?

[Jake V]

"What has been misinterpreted as a settlement is a court document that Gary's very own attorneys agreed to, along with Marvel's attorneys. That document basically ends his lawsuit against Marvel at the trial court level with Marvel having won and Gary's case dismissed. By agreeing on a number for the profits Gary made from selling unlicensed Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider merchandise after the court has decided that Marvel is the owner of that copyright, it allows Gary's attorneys to file his appeal now rather than have Gary litigate further."


But, if I'm understanding correctly, it is a fine/punishment if the appeal ultimately fails, isn't it?

One that Friedrich and his lawyers agreed to, yes.

[Another Aaron]

That's my understanding as well.

[sparticus]

But, if I'm understanding correctly, it is a fine/punishment if the appeal ultimately fails, isn't it?

Not quite. I'm not a lawyer, but I have been sued before. What happened at the start of the case was that both our parties agreed costs, we said if we lose we are happy that these are the costs of the accident. If we were found at fault, we would have to pay those costs (plus other damages the judge would decide). So in our case we agreed that the guy suing us' bike was worth £1000 (or whatever it was) so that if we lost we wouldn't have to argue all that stuff through. We won the case so it was irrelevant, but my understanding is that that stuff happens all the time. It's just a time saver. Marvel go "if you guys are found guilty off this you owe us $20k." And they go "no $15k" and then they settle on $17. And then if Marvel win, they can claim that $17k (though I imagine they could probably waive it).

[Scavenger]

He was selling signed Ghost Rider books that he owned already

He was selling prints he had made from someone else's artwork.
Take Marvel out of it, and he's still selling prints of Mike Ploog's artwork, without permission from or compensation to Mike Ploog.

Would it hurt Marvel to initiate a program similar to DC's where creators from the past get some income from properties they helped create whenever those characters are exploited in other media?

Where do you get the idea that DC does this? Specific creators get income from stuff...but not everyone. And DC's record of reprints from a certain time frame show they're not all that happy about that kind of thing, either.

[RolandJP]

He was selling prints he had made from someone else's artwork.
Take Marvel out of it, and he's still selling prints of Mike Ploog's artwork, without permission from or compensation to Mike Ploog.


.

Greg Land better hire a good defense lawyer. Those porn-stars he homages in his work are gonna come after him.( I fought really hard to not spell "come" a certain way for laughs)