It seems like every time Stan Lee’s in these days, it’s either because he’s created a new property (or five) or because he’s embroiled in some lawsuit. Today, it’s something of a combination of both as the recently-announced STAN LEE’S SUPER SEVEN is getting slapped with a lawsuit by the Super 7 toy company. The Hollywood Reporter’s saying that the latter claims it notified POW! and A Squared (the companies behind SUPER SEVEN) about potential copyright infringement in February. The response they got said that the name would be changed from SUPER SEVEN to STAN LEE’S SUPER SEVEN, but Super 7 thought that wasn’t different enough.  Dialogue between the companies apparently ceased until just recently, when Super 7 filed a US District Court complaint after STAN LEE’S SUPER SEVEN’s big launch at Comic Con.

You’ll recall that we reported on SUPER SEVEN’s launch back in February. The series will be published by Archie and it’s about Stan Lee, himself, leading a group of alien superheroes who've just crash landed on Earth. Super 7 the company, however, specializes in Japanese-themed collector’s toys and figurines ,with licenses including ULTRAMAN, KAMEN RIDER and even STAR WARS.

As I mentioned, this is the latest of several lawsuits that Lee’s been involved in over the past few years. He sued Marvel at one point on claims of withheld royalties and there were a number of odd cases involving his company, Stan Lee Media. After he left it, its president sued Marvel for $5 billion on character co-ownership claims and then sued Lee (leading to the bizarre circumstance of Lee seeming to get sued by himself.)

Tom Pinchuk’s the writer of HYBRID BASTARDS! & UNIMAGINABLE. Order them on Amazon here & here.

another lawsuit....

Stupid lawsuits

Too many lawsuits.

let him be jeez

" let him be jeez "

Super 7 and Super Seven wasn't different enough? What's going to happen with Steven Spielberg's Super 8? O_O

" another lawsuit.... "

They must not have faith in their customers if they think they can't tell the difference between PUBLISHING and bad vinyl toys. Seven? 7? Really even with Stan Lee's name added to it. Must be tanking if they are going to try and squeeze money out of him. That is ridiculous to sue over such a petty thing. NO ONE will mix the two up. It'll probably get dropped.

Gotta love how everyone is sue crazy these days...  :-\

I'm so glad that we british don't have this fantical need to sue everything and anything.

I need money for my mortgage, I hope Stan Lee creates a Stan Lee's Supremo Maximo character.

"let him be jeez "

Stan should smite their asses...

The case is baseless. I don't think that anyone is going to confuse a comic starring Stan Lee, with a company that makes figures. There's no market crossover.

This is dumb... No reason to create a fuzz about Super Seven over something that is totally different... Toys and a story? C'Mon!

This has to be the flimsiest lawsuit EVER, calling it stan lee's super seven is a big enough change so i think this case will fade pretty quickly

Ironically I can understand to a small degree why the toy company Super 7 would potentially have concerns because they have figures based on comics and TV character properties.  Stan Lee's Super Seven is a comic so I am speculating that the toy company Super 7 has its panties in a bunch because they are thinking Stan Lee's property will expand into toy figures as well.   
 
Not saying its right, but if the toy company Super 7 has the name COPYRIGHTED then they may potentially have a case but in the long run, I don't think they will able to receive any type of money.  All they will achieve is cause Stan Lee and company to simply change the name to Stan Lee's Super Seven as indicated in the article, or possibly a different name.  Sometimes the concept of Karma plays into things.   
  
In this instance,  I think the  lawyers are acting like supervillains.

the funny thing is that I just checked out Super 7's website and you would think that any attention they get inadvertently or not that they would be happy with it

Those complaining about lawsuits need to realize that intellectual property makes up more than half of ALL U.S. exports and drives 40% of the country's growth (source: U.S. Chamber of Commerce; 2010 website)... obviously this is things like software, biotech, pharm, etc... but it's also why the USA is a juggernaut in terms of entertainment and publishing. 
 
I have a huge respect for China's rise (check this post) and they have 600,000 engineers to every 70,000 American engineers (source: NYT; '05) and a billion minds to create, imagine, and consume... and yet, it is Hollywood that is globally prescient, it is American superheroes who define the genre, and it is the American market which even decides whether entertainment elsewhere is ultimately successful on a global scale whether Harry Potter or the next Miyazaki film from Ghibli Studios. 
 
Why? 
 
Because Americans, by and large, respect Intellectual Property law.  Even when we deliberately circumvent it, overtly steal, or denigrate it, we know that it exists in general, we are aware of- if not the wrongness of our acts at least the illegality of it, and even the most radical amongst western anti-IP law philosophers still believe in authorship attribution- a certain degree of moral or ownership over a creation if only in lip-service.  More generally, most of us believe in rewarding an innovator or creator or investor and there's a certain understanding that created works (loosely, but not legally, "ideas") can be owned. 
 
All of that is meaningless without enforcement... and that's where the lawsuits come in.  We set up the law to say "fair is fair" but simultaneously and sensibly we say, "but only if you assert your rights."  Who is going to fight for you if you don't do it?  We let people contract around issues, settle, or let things slide, but it would be unjust to appear to let things slide- waiving your rights- then come down the pipe 10 years later after the other person proves to be successful and then sue.  So this requires creators to defend their rights up front.  Anyways, the point is that with this culture, set of values, set of laws, and enforcement... we have an entertainment industry that thrives, makes names, and creates successes on a global scale. 
 
Contrast that to China or other weak IP systems.  They still create, they still have culture, no doubt as humans that impetus is within us even without economic incentive... but without that incentive the impact and style of those works rarely ever match the American juggernaut. 
 
Basically, you can hate the lawsuits, but then don't come crying when icons fade, when piracy is rampant, and when there's a sort of grey homogeneity and obscurity to superhero comics.

" This has to be the flimsiest lawsuit EVER, calling it stan lee's super seven is a big enough change so i think this case will fade pretty quickly "

they are just using this for publicity...cause no one wants to buy their ugly toys

Suing.  It's the American way.

Karma for screwing the Kirby's

So does something like this have a bearing on precedent for Super 7 in comics?  A cartoon show from 1978:
 
   

Now I would think that who ever owns the rights to the Super 7 cartoon of the late 70's and early 80's should be the ones upset.