Follow

    Jack Kirby

    Person » Jack Kirby is credited in 3374 issues.

    One of the medium's most prolific artistic legends, Jack Kirby, "The King of Comics," was an artist, writer, and editor whose work spanned the Golden, Silver, Bronze and Modern ages of comics. Kirby created and co-created a multitude of Marvel and DC's most popular characters and many others, too. Kirby was one of the most respected artists of his time (though he didn't have personal knowledge of that, until later on), and remains so today.

    Marvel Sues Over Rights Of Spider-Man, X-Men, FF4

    • 92 results
    • 1
    • 2
    Avatar image for illituracy
    iLLituracy

    13600

    Forum Posts

    1161

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #51  Edited By iLLituracy

    This upsets me deeply.

    Avatar image for mr__hellfire
    Mr. Hellfire

    65

    Forum Posts

    64

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #52  Edited By Mr. Hellfire
    @Babs:
    That's a bit of a weird one. I've heard multiple sources over the years claim that the extent of his involvement was the cover art for his debut issue. Now I have heard people say that the Fly, a comic Kirby did for the Red Circle was very similar to Spider-Man (no idea though, I've never read it). So I think that if Kirby did have any input on Spider-Man's creation, you might be able to make a decent argument that he recycled ideas from the Fly as some sort of evidence in his hand of Spidey's creation.
    Avatar image for negamegas
    negamegas

    323

    Forum Posts

    1944

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 2

    User Lists: 4

    #53  Edited By negamegas

    Heh, well I'm rather interested to see what would happen to Marvel if they loosed all of them. 
     
    I'd so lol my pants if DC Bought the rights. XD

    Avatar image for theblueangel93
    TheBlueAngel93

    21064

    Forum Posts

    16240

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: -1

    #54  Edited By TheBlueAngel93

    Oh...I thought this was Marvel growing up and buying back all of their movie rights, this was a let down...

    Avatar image for illyana_rasputin
    Illyana Rasputin

    2924

    Forum Posts

    69898

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 17

    User Lists: 0

    #55  Edited By Illyana Rasputin

    This is a perplexing dilemma.

    Avatar image for blackestnight1
    Blackestnight1

    687

    Forum Posts

    1666

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 5

    #56  Edited By Blackestnight1

    Do you think the Kirby Estate should gain the rights to these concepts and characters?
     
    No. Because they aren't all his concepts. Kirby was an artist and the best but he didn't invent Spider-man so I am not sure why he is on the list with FF and the Hulk. He just drew in those books. It's not like the Superman thing because DC really didn't invent Superman they stole him. But it wasn't illegal, because he wasn't copyrighted, it was just dirty.  
     
    Kirby co-invented some of the characters with Lee. He was also paid for it. However, and he agreed to this, albeit grudgingly, Marvel or Atlas comics owned all of it, as a company not as individuals. You can see down the road how complex things would be if each person said well I invented this little part of the story here or this name so bla bla bla. People are paid for arcs and stories and art, editing etc but you've got to claim a character from the start as you made it if that's how you're going to go. With out the company no one would know who your character was but you. Ultimately it's the company's.  (That's how Disney works too ask Adam Philips)
     
    Thing is, a Character is one thing but each comic is its own thing, I think, even if it uses a character from whatever, the book the story etc should count as much as the characters.  I would say more.
     
    I don't know how many stories use vampires in them or even Dracula, but each one, even if it has a similar look, is actually a different character because it's doing different things.  Same for elves, wizards and other common fantasy stuff. It's not like whoever made up vampires or in the case of Bram Stoker, Dracula can own rights to all films books etc with his character when he stole a character (a vampire) to start with and just gave it a name... Much less if he just drew it in a book. You can argue Hulk (originally) was a rip from Frankenstein and Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. (both were on TV the year he was invented too) He's green he morphs when he's angry and he used to look just like Frankenstein. Superman is not all that different from so many mythical gods. (as are Diana and Thor) Plus it's really just one story about him. Every story after the origin could stand on it's own. You have characters now who don't even have origins yet. It's what the character does after the first issue that makes it what it is too. It's not like the character wouldn't exist if you hadn't given it a birth story. I don't think it's fair to collect on an idea forever. Get your big check but once you pass the ball and others are really doing the work and continuing to allow your creation to exist then they have the right to use it, because it is really up to their imaginations now.


    The Japanese character Mario is in about a 100 games and tons of books etc. Still the game makers owns the game he makes and the Mario inventor gets a cut royalties etc. When he dies his relatives could just pull the character. If you start stuff like this it's a very slippy slope of patenting everything. Oh that's my fire ball, oh well I invented jumping on things, well that coin shape was my idea etc etc.
     
    Kirby was paid. He was paid to draw. He was paid to edit etc. He helped invent some characters, characters which have since been changed dramatically. It's a tricky question when someone else does all this work on a story but it uses a concept from the past which it evolved. Luckily that's answered as they did it.  
     
    You couldn't join an established company with like 5000 characters and universe to play in already made and make up one person who your company then helps push and promote and then leave the company and take it with you and start your own comic with that character in it. It's property of the company, and you get your money for creating original stuff but that doesn't mean you get the rights and can take your character away and go writning with it in a different company or your own company 
     
    You'd at least have to change it some. AKA Venum to Spawn.  Hulk FF X-men etc belong to Marvel not Kirby not even Stan Lee. Once you leave Marvel you leave. Any royalties etc should have been worked out when it was happening and not after a man dies.

    Avatar image for timrothsays
    timrothsays

    714

    Forum Posts

    3387

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 40

    User Lists: 8

    #57  Edited By timrothsays
    @iLLituracy said:
    " This upsets me deeply. "
    Avatar image for emerald_general_jai
    Emerald_General_Jai

    2483

    Forum Posts

    99148

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 13

    User Lists: 9

    WTF is up with these heirs? You didn't do anything, u don't deserve nothing. 

    Avatar image for haloking343
    HaloKing343

    1355

    Forum Posts

    1751

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 91

    User Lists: 1

    #59  Edited By HaloKing343

    It's all Marvel. Does it even matter?

    Avatar image for bingbangboom
    bingbangboom

    782

    Forum Posts

    814

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 2

    User Lists: 4

    #60  Edited By bingbangboom

    It is just odd, that like this stuff wasn't really handled so long ago. To my knowledge, this is all owned by Marvel. But then again you never know and it is possible somewhere that these characters will be owned by the Kirby Estate. I don't see that happening considering the fact that they were not soul creations, he didn't write and draw the book. If anything the Kirby Estate just wants a buyout and Marvel is trying to go over that.

    Avatar image for supergamera
    SuperGamera

    628

    Forum Posts

    18676

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 8

    User Lists: 2

    #61  Edited By SuperGamera

    I only read DC most of the time so I don't really care
    Avatar image for winduizcool
    Winduizcool

    891

    Forum Posts

    200

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #62  Edited By Winduizcool
    @Babs said:
    " @Winduizcool said:
    " Disney buying Marvel was the worst decision ever. Wolverine teams up with Bambi. Iron Man falling in love with Snow White. Thor trades his hammer for Aladdin's lamp. The world is doomed. "
    *Face palms* This has nothing to do with this article. "
    I know but you mentioned Walt Disney and I was reminded how Disney bought Marvel. 
    @InnerVenom123 said:
    " @Winduizcool said:
    "Disney buying Marvel was the worst decision ever. Wolverine teams up with Bambi. Iron Man falling in love with Snow White. Thor trades his hammer for Aladdin's lamp. The world is doomed. "
    If you're serious, you've made a terrible, unlikely(Since Disney uh.... LIKES money.) point. If you're joking, congrats, I lol-ed. "

    It was a joke. 
    Avatar image for sierra_comics_captain
    Sierra Comics Captain

    56

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 3

    no it was ditko who designed spideys costume . Stan Lee said Kirby made Spider Man coming at youwith a web gun and some silver costume. 

    Avatar image for toastalchemist
    Toastalchemist

    189

    Forum Posts

    15

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #64  Edited By Toastalchemist

    I don't think Marvel losing those characters is that bad. They've been writing the same characters for decades, it's time to make some new ones.

    Avatar image for mr__wilson
    Mr. Wilson

    6449

    Forum Posts

    1838

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 2

    #65  Edited By Mr. Wilson

    Serves the Kirby heirs.  They kept pushing for the characters that didn't belong to them and Marvels shutting them down. 
    Avatar image for gmanfromheck
    gmanfromheck

    42524

    Forum Posts

    259238

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 472

    User Lists: 2

    #66  Edited By gmanfromheck
    @joshmightbe: Kirby had designed some other spider-type character.  The heirs involved are trying to say that since it's a spider, he created Spider-Man:

    No Caption Provided

    Funny thing is, Jack Kirby's daughter, Lisa, was quoted as saying:

    "Neither one of my parents ever mentioned that my father created him, in fact I have heard my mother correcting people if they alluded to that fact."

    Avatar image for fanboy_1
    fanboy#1

    1052

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #67  Edited By fanboy#1

    gold diggers
    Avatar image for king_quisling
    King Quisling

    2073

    Forum Posts

    57

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #68  Edited By King Quisling

    Kirby would most likely want the characters to stay exactly where they are.

    Avatar image for buns134
    buns134

    337

    Forum Posts

    548

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 2

    User Lists: 8

    #69  Edited By buns134

    actually i came up with spiderman not Kirby or Lee I also wrote a part of the bible GOSH just give them to Disney!

    Avatar image for dro
    Dro

    929

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #70  Edited By Dro

    Here's the info on the way this works, legally.
     
    First off, Marvel isn't looking for any money or trying to sue for the rights to Spider-Man/FF. The Kirby Estate issued legal notices that would terminate Marvel's copywright permission for Spider-Man, FF, etc. Marvel is asking a judge to invalidate those notices, based on the fact that the Kirby estate DOESN'T, in fact, hold those copywrights. For an analogy: you're a kid and you have a game boy. Your sister demands your game boy, and says it's hers. She even claims to your mother that it's hers. You ask your mother to invalidate your sister's claim, because the game boy is yours, not your sisters. The game boy is the copywrights for the characters.
     
    Also another fun fact. You can literally sue for anything. You can sue your significant other for snoring. It's legal. The big problem is winning.

    Avatar image for margotlefaye
    margotlefaye

    6

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #71  Edited By margotlefaye
    @Decept-O: See this site about Copyright from Cornell, scrolling down to the bottom for the section on copyright of architecture:
     
     http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm
     
    I take that to mean that for any building constructed after November 30, 1990, the design is copyrighted, such that no one could copy the design for another building.  And, remember, the "work-for-hire" language applies to an employee, not to an independent contractor or freelancer.   So, Green Bank commissions architect John Smith to build their new corporate headquarters.  They have a contract, but he is not an employee of the firm.  They don't pay him a salary, offer him benefits, etc. and he has no expectation of continued employment once this particular project is completed.  They pay him a set fee for the work of designing their building.  He keeps the rights to that design, and his heirs will keep them for 70 years after his death.   If, however, Green Bank commissions the architectural firm of Jones & Brown to design their new building, and Smith is an employee of Jones & Brown, the architectural firm would own the copyright for the short of 95 years from date of publication (I assume this would be interpreted as construction of the building) or 120 years from the date of creation (I assume this would be of design of the building).  Now, if the firm is Smith, Jones & Brown, comprised of the three individual architects, each of whom has some input into the design, it is a work of joint authorship and all three have rights to the design. Meaning Smith's heirs, Jones' heirs and Brown's heirs would retain rights for 70 years after the respective deaths.
     
    Complex, isn't it...
    Avatar image for bandito
    Bandito

    188

    Forum Posts

    2

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #72  Edited By Bandito
    @Dro said:
    " Also another fun fact. You can literally sue for anything. You can sue your significant other for snoring. It's legal. The big problem is winning. "
    Totally worth it for a decent night's sleep!
    Avatar image for margotlefaye
    margotlefaye

    6

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #73  Edited By margotlefaye
    @Dro: Not exactly.  The Kirby estate served the termination notice in order to "recapture" rights that were transferred to Marvel (possibly reluctantly) by Kirby.  And, copyright law allows them to do that.  One can transfer one's rights to another entity, and, 35 years after that transfer, one can serve a notice of termination, thereby recapturing those rights.  That is what Dame Jean Conan Doyle, Lady Bromet, did in order to recapture the copyright to the works of her father, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.  Her estate still owns the Sherlock Holmes copyright to the only work still under copyright protection, the Casefiles.  Andrea Plunket has been disputing the validity of that recapture, since she was part of the consortium that owned the rights Dame Jean recaptured. Plunket has lost ever court case thus far, but may be continuing to appeal.
     
    I seem to have accidentally deleted my earlier, lengthy post on the Kirby subject, but I'll try to recap in a shorter form.
     
    The "work for hire" language came into law in 1976.  I remember how many comic artists were bitter about this, and felt that their rights were stolen by the corporations they were working for, with the collusion of lawmakers.  Kirby may have been one of them.  I'm not sure why the family is arguing that pre-1976 works were not works-for-hire; most likely it has to do with legal technicalities only a copyright lawyer could sort out.   Just because Kirby was paid for creating the works does not, in and of itself, make them "works for hire" under copyright law.  Kirby would have to be an employee of a company, and the courts look to a number of factors to determine if he was an employee, including tax status, benefits, etc.  If he was an independent contractor or freelancer, then no matter how much he was paind, he retained the copyrights to whatever characters he created.  And, where characters or works were jointly created, then all parties who created the characters/works have rights to them (unless created as corporate works by employees of a corporation).
     
    Now, take the emotion out of the equation, and consider this: if we were talking about any other form of property other than intellectual creative property, say stock portfolios, or the company your grandfather built from the ground up, or an art collection, or simply a bunch of cash in a bank account that's been gathering interest, would you really be calling the original owners heirs "greedy" for wanting title to those things, even though they didn't create them, or would you be calling the corporation trying to cut the heirs out of title greedy for denying the heirs their rights?
     
    Recognizing that mine will be an unpopular opinion, I hope that, in any case where Kirby did not want to transfer rights but felt forced to do so by circumstances, that his family is able to recapture those rights. Anything else is an injustice to him and to his creations.
     
    ETA: If someone else created a character, then no matter how many times Kirby was hired to create a new work including that character, and even if he created those works as an independent contractor, he has no rights to the character.  It is someone else's creation.  His rights would be limited to whatever new content he created for the new work, and then, only if he were working as a freelancer/independent contractor.
    Avatar image for yolk
    Yolk

    32

    Forum Posts

    586

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 0

    #74  Edited By Yolk

    I say the descendants can heve 'em. 
     
    It's not like Marvel is doing anything good or productive with 'em.
    Avatar image for gothic_storm
    Gothic Storm

    892

    Forum Posts

    394

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 16

    #75  Edited By Gothic Storm

    Disney will end up giving them a large "out-of-court" settlement, just wait and see. Marvel is feeling the pains of what DC had to put up with last year. 
     
    This goes to show you that your grandkids won't care about what you do with your life until AFTER you are dead and gone.

    Avatar image for meganwayne
    MeganWayne

    76

    Forum Posts

    216

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #76  Edited By MeganWayne

    Suing over the original X-men right?

    Avatar image for whitley
    Whitley

    84

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #77  Edited By Whitley
    @bingbangboom said:
    "It is just odd, that like this stuff wasn't really handled so long ago. To my knowledge, this is all owned by Marvel. But then again you never know and it is possible somewhere that these characters will be owned by the Kirby Estate. I don't see that happening considering the fact that they were not soul creations, he didn't write and draw the book. If anything the Kirby Estate just wants a buyout and Marvel is trying to go over that. "
    John Romita Sr. was an intern at Marvel back in the Kirby/Lee days. And he would ride home with them Kirby and Lee would be talking about stories on the FF and things like that. Not hearing the other one. Both would get out convinced they had convinced the other. When netiher had heard the other.  Read The Comic Book Heroes. It is very clear in there that while it was a colloboration. Kirby came up with most of the characters, a lot of the plot and the best Lee could do was put words in it.  Look over the work Lee did in the early days when he was not working with Kirby or Ditko. It is pretty crappy stuff. 
     
    Jack was always in his own world, and Lee always gave a good interview. But those characters that Kirby created it pretty much is most of the Marvel World. While they might not be as popular consider the Marvel Universe without: The FF, Dr. Doom, The Inhumans, Black Panther, Galactus, The Silver Surfer,  Captain America, The Red Skull, Thor, The X-Men, Iron Man, Wasp, Hank Pym, Professor Xavier, The Hulk (including Rick Jones, Betty Ross etc.). 
     
    Without Jack Kirby there would be no comic books as we know them today. 
     
    Avatar image for whitley
    Whitley

    84

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #78  Edited By Whitley
    @MeganWayne said:
    "Suing over the original X-men right? "

    Well that would include Professor X and Magento and possibly others in the X-Universe
    Avatar image for emperor_gonzo_noir
    Emperor Gonzo Noir

    19151

    Forum Posts

    1989

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 2

    User Lists: 17

    OH NOES !! no more Rawhide Kid stories! lol

    Avatar image for kalel60
    kalel60

    27

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #80  Edited By kalel60

    no this isn't right it's been too long and the company thru many writers and artists,have established the characters what it is today.it's not just a 1 person thing! and it just seems like the family is money hungery for what it is today...
    Avatar image for margotlefaye
    margotlefaye

    6

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #81  Edited By margotlefaye
    @kalel60: Again, though, it's a legal issue.  For whichever characters Kirby created that were not "works for hire" his family has the legal right to recapture copyrights.  Their motives for doing so don't matter.  Whoever else worked on Kirby's creations, and what they did with them doesn't matter.  How much of Marvel's financial empire depends on keeping those characters doesn't matter.  In law, it's an issue of what rights did Kirby retain which are by law now the property of his estate until 2064 (or thereabouts) and what rights did he transfer which, again under law, his estate has the right to recapture, 35 years after the initial transfer, by serving notice of termination?  (And, they would keep those rights until about 2064, after which the characters would enter public domain.)  Marvel is suing the family to invalidate the notices, probably by arguing that the characters in question were all "works for hire."  The family is vigorously denying that.  They've pointed out that Kirby worked from home and there are some sites with Kirby bios that talk about his dissatisfaction with working for Marvel and DC because of not getting benefits.  Ironically, failure to give the guy health benefits then (if that is indeed what happened) might be one of the things that costs Marvel the right to claim "work for hire" status, now.  Benefits are one of the things the courts look to in making a determination of whether a person was an employee or an independent contractor/freelancer.
     
    I have no idea how this is all going to play out.  If the family can prove that Kirby was working as a freelancer, then they can, and should, get the rights back.  If Marvel can prove "work for hire" then they have corporate authorship rights for the shorter of 120 years from creation or 95 from publication.  Honestly?  The bios I've read portray Kirby as fairly bitter about his treatment by DC and Marvel.  If that's accurate, then I'm all in favor of him having the last laugh, if only from the grave.
    Avatar image for venom32708
    venom32708

    54

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #82  Edited By venom32708

    jack kirby created spider-man and he was originally gonna call him the silver spider all stan lee did was change his name and add witty remarks

    Avatar image for caligula
    Caligula

    12660

    Forum Posts

    44899

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 6

    User Lists: 12

    #83  Edited By Caligula

    Honestly I would, like to see the Kirby family get those characters, and hopefully sell them to someone who will make them cool again. Marvel has been garbage for awhile now, and most of their characters are just page fillers anymore, their is no real life to them anymore. Marvel needs to hire some better writers cause everything except civil war has been poorly written, and half-assed. 
     
    mabye it's the DC fanboy-ism coming out, but I really think Marvel is letting their characters becom shells of their former selves, and their comics feel to short, almost as if they have run out of content. yet they charge full price for what I call half a comic.
    Avatar image for iron_fist_angel
    Iron Fist Angel

    264

    Forum Posts

    16061

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 3

    #84  Edited By Iron Fist Angel
    @Mr. Hellfire said:
    " @Stormultt: Yeah. I mean as long as they retain the rights to the name X-Men (I doubt the Kirbys would be able to try to say it belongs to them) and all the other popular characters, it's no big loss.   Though if they did win the characters, I'm wondering if they would lease them to Marvel like DC is doing with the Archie and Milestone heroes. "
     
         That's exactly what would happen. Even if Marvel was to lose this, (and I HIGHLY doubt that will happen), they will shell out big bucks in order to keep using most of the characters. The X-men with no Cyclops? I don't think so.
    Avatar image for dondasch
    dondasch

    932

    Forum Posts

    5

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #85  Edited By dondasch

    This seems like a classic money ploy by the heirs of Jack Kirby's estate who are supposedly looking out his (read their) interests.  It is entirely likely that some sort of agreement will be reached, as is potential in the Superman drama from last year.  I could be wrong, but I don't think that neither the heirs nor Marvel nor the public will want their entertainment stream interrupted.

    Avatar image for copymanrules
    copymanrules

    51

    Forum Posts

    96

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #86  Edited By copymanrules

    money money money makes the world go crazy or something like that
    since Disney bought marvel for lots of mula why not the kirbys have a piece of the pie or have some control of it

    Avatar image for 00_raiser
    00 Raiser

    450

    Forum Posts

    25

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 2

    User Lists: 1

    #87  Edited By 00 Raiser

    Money hungry fools. They probably are in league with the heirs of Superman. Im starting to get tired of the legal comic book bs. Maybe I should just start my own stuff and see how far it gets LOL.

    Avatar image for 137
    Om1kron

    1224

    Forum Posts

    63

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 4

    User Lists: 0

    #88  Edited By Om1kron

    in a nutshell his family is a bunch of losers and they're trying to live off of another mans hard work... I mean I don't give a shit if the guy is their great grandfather or didn't work for mavel yada ya. It's a two way street, if it were not for marvel this mans stuff would still be in a sketchbook somewhere unpublished. The fact that in this economy these people are trying to make a buck off of someone elses imagination pisses me off. They're no worse than someone who plagiarizes.

    Avatar image for master_of_evil
    Master_Of_Evil

    142

    Forum Posts

    440

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 4

    #89  Edited By Master_Of_Evil

    if it prevents disney from having the rights than the kirby family now has my full support
    Avatar image for illituracy
    iLLituracy

    13600

    Forum Posts

    1161

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #90  Edited By iLLituracy
    @Master_Of_Evil said:
    " if it prevents disney from having the rights than the kirby family now has my full support "
    You don't know what you're saying. And for that, I forgive you.
    Avatar image for cylencer
    Cylencer

    15

    Forum Posts

    58

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #91  Edited By Cylencer

     YYYYAAAAAAAAYYYY (thank gods). Now maybe they can be done/continued with some integrety other than "how much money can this make"?

    Avatar image for whitley
    Whitley

    84

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #92  Edited By Whitley

    It is pretty clear that from reading Comic Book bios that back then the artists were working strictly for page rates. Kirby wanted to get some committment from Marvel that he would be taken care of, but he never got anything in writing from them.  Hell back in 1986, Kirby had to sure just to get his original artwork back from Marvel. Marvel was claiming back then (with Jim Shooter the man in charge then) that all Kirby was an "artist" and that Marvel owned all his original artwork.  
     
    It could be very interesting....Imagine this Marvel....your comic book world without 
     
    The Fantastic Four universe (including Galactus, Silver Surfer, Dr. Doom and the Inhumans) , The Watcher 
     
    The X-Men universe without: Cyclops, Professor Xavier, Jean Grey, Angel, Beast, Iceman 
     
    The Avengers Universe Without: Captain America, Thor, Iron Man, Wasp, Hank Pym, Loki, High Evolutionary, Egghead, Fing Fang Foom, Hellcat, Nick Fury and S.H.I.E.L.D, The Black Panther 
     
    And: The Hulk, Wakanda (Black Panther's kingdom), The Eternals, Olympians,  The Red Skull, Asgard and the Asgardians
     
    In addition he did the first cover (Amazing Fantasy #15) of Spider-Man (reportedly Lee thought Kirby's rendition of Parker was too James Dean like and gave it to Ditko).  

    This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

    Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

    Comment and Save

    Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.