‘The People’s Joker’ and the Perils of Playing With a Studio’s Copyright; The New York Times, April 1, 2024

 Eric Grode, The New York Times; ‘The People’s Joker’ and the Perils of Playing With a Studio’s Copyright

"The Joker may be the purview of DC Comics, not Marvel, but the fear of running afoul of copyright laws was no less of a concern.

“I kept myself very informed legally in terms of what qualifies as a parody and what fair use really is,” said Drew, referring to the legal doctrine that allows artists to use copyrighted material without permission or consequence depending on the circumstances. The “People’s Joker” poster calls it “A Fair Use Film by Vera Drew.”

Rebecca Tushnet, a professor at Harvard Law School and an expert in fair use, said artistic works find themselves on safer legal ground when they comment on the original material in a transformative way.

“Favored use is critical in that it performs an interpretation,” said Tushnet, who has not seen the film but was willing to discuss it in the abstract. “A parody is the classic example, but it doesn’t have to be funny. If the metaphor that the Joker represents here is a different metaphor, then it might well fall under the category of transformative fair use."”

Neal Adams, Comic Book Artist Who Revitalized Batman and Fought for Creators’ Rights, Dies at 80; The Hollywood Reporter, April 29, 2022

Borys Kit, The Hollywood Reporter; Neal Adams, Comic Book Artist Who Revitalized Batman and Fought for Creators’ Rights, Dies at 80

"Adams also worked tirelessly to promote better working conditions and, radically at the time, creators’ rights, especially for their work. He early on recognized the value of creators and was a thorn in the side of publishers, demanding compensation for himself and others when their characters were adapted off the page.

He, along with Stan Lee, formed the Academy of Comic Book Arts, hoping to start a union that would fight for benefits and ownership on behalf of writers and artists. Lee wanted an organization that was more akin to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, and the two parted ways.

In the late ’70s, when a new federal work-for-hire law was being enshrined, Marvel and then editor-in-chief Jim Shooter distributed contracts that stated freelancers could not assert copyright over their creations. As detailed in Reisman’s 2021 Lee biography, True Believer, Adams sent around a copy of the contract, scrawling on top, “Do Not Sign This Contract! You Will Be Signing Your Life Away!” While it caused a ruckus and awareness, the effort didn’t have its intended effect as Marvel flexed its muscle and threatened anyone who tried to unionize with a drying up of the freelance well."

A Spider-Man Comic Was Written By A.I. And The Result Is Madness; Screen Rant, August 31, 2020

Kevin Erdmann, Screen Rant; A Spider-Man Comic Was Written By A.I. And The Result Is Madness

"Some DC Comics fans may be familiar with the Batman script that's long been trending on the internet created by Keaton Patti. He wrote it using a bot he forced to watch 1,000 hours of Batman films, resulting in a wild and wacky script of epic proportions. Recently, Marvel Comics reached out to Keaton, asking him to have his bot create a Spider-Man story in the same vein as part of their 25th issue of the current Amazing Spider-Man series. The result is one of the greatest and most hilarious short Spidey stories of all time.

The story itself is featured at the end of Spider-Man #25. Titled "Robo-Helpers," it was written by Patti's bot, reportedly after having it read every Spider-Man comic ever, with the art coming from humans Dan Hipp and Joe Caramanga."

Shazam! Vs. Captain Marvel: The Bizarre Battle Over a Name; Comic Book Resources, January 27, 2019

Brian Cronin, Comic Book Resources; Shazam! Vs. Captain Marvel: The Bizarre Battle Over a Name

"Eventually, most fans will only known [sic] the hero formerly known as Captain Marvel as Shazam. It's a bit of a shame, but that's how the intellectual property rights fell."

Marvel Uses DC Comics to Fight for ‘Jean Grey’ Trademark; Bleeding Cool, February 4, 2018

Rich Johnston, Bleeding Cool; Marvel Uses DC Comics to Fight for ‘Jean Grey’ Trademark

"Marvel was invited to respond to submit evidence that “the applied-for mark is used to identify the goods in addition to identifying the character.”

Oh, and while they were at it, confirm that Jean Grey is not a real living person.

Well, Marvel has now responded, and is using evidence of its claims, almost 700 pages’ worth, of images of valid trademarks — mostly from DC Comics — to make its point.

Which is basically a) yes, we can, b) you’ve done it for other people before, and c) you’ve done it for us before."

11 THINGS DC COMICS TAUGHT US ABOUT KFC'S MULTIDIMENSIONAL COLONEL SANDERS; Comic Book Resources, 7/5/16

Meagan Damore, Comic Book Resources; 11 THINGS DC COMICS TAUGHT US ABOUT KFC'S MULTIDIMENSIONAL COLONEL SANDERS:

[Kip Currier: Colonel Sanders' Original Recipe of 11 herbs and spices, owned by KFC, is probably the 2nd most famous trade secret in the world. The zany--and props-for-creativity--free comic "KFC: The Colonel Corps" has the villainous Colonel Sunder scheming to pluck the perennially sought-after secret recipe from Colonel Sanders' control to leverage it for...wait for it...WORLD-WIDE RESTAURANT DOMINION. Cue mustache...err, goatee twirl.]

""KFC: The Colonel Corps" -- available for free on comiXology -- pits Earth-1's Colonel Sanders against an old foe: Colonel Sunder, our fast food hero's evil doppelganger from Earth-3. Colonel Sanders first encountered him in "The Colonel of Two Worlds" special, and -- in "The Colonel Corps" -- Sunder is back to his evil ways: he wants to steal Sanders' recipe and take the easy way out in conquering the restaurant business, instead of putting hard work into becoming number one. In order to overcome Sunder, Sanders teams up with his doppelgangers from across the multiverse to put an end to Sunder's plans once and for all.

It's every bit as ridiculous as it sounds, and twice as fun."

MARVEL & DC COMICS DROP CASE AGAINST SMALL BUSINESSMAN OVER USE OF THE WORD "SUPERHERO"; Comic Book Resources, 5/24/16

Meagan Damore, Comic Book Resources; MARVEL & DC COMICS DROP CASE AGAINST SMALL BUSINESSMAN OVER USE OF THE WORD "SUPERHERO":

"Marvel and DC Comics have officially dropped a case against small businessman Graham Jules over the use of the word "superhero." According to The Mirror, Jules can now legally use the word in his book title "Business Zero to Superhero."

When Jules attempted to publish his start-up manual, the two major comic book companies contested his use of "superhero," as the two publishers had jointly trademarked the word in 1979, covering a range of products, from comic books and playing cards to pencil sharpeners and glue. Their renewal of that mark in 2006 drew widespread attention, as well as scrutiny from those who question whether such a term should be allowed to be registered. They claimed Jules' title infringed on this trademark, while he argued that the word had become part of everyday language.

Supreme Court won’t hear Batmobile copyright dispute; ComicBookResources.com, 3/7/16

Kevin Melrose, ComicBookResources.com; Supreme Court won’t hear Batmobile copyright dispute:

"The U.S. Supreme Court this morning declined to review a ruling that the Batmobile isn’t merely an automobile, but rather distinctive enough to warrant copyright protection.

Mark Towle, who previously created unlicensed replicas of the 1966 and 1989 Batmobiles, petitioned the high court in January to consider his five-year-old dispute with DC Comics. The company had sued Towle in 2011, claiming his Gotham Garage violated its trademarks and copyrights by manufacturing the replicas, which he sold for about $90,000 each."

Appeals court upholds Warner Bros.’ Superman rights; ComicBookResources.com, 2/11/16

Kevin Melrose, ComicBookResources.com; Appeals court upholds Warner Bros.’ Superman rights:

"A federal appeals court has again sided with DC Comics and Warner Bros. in the long-running feud over the rights to the Man of Steel.

As first reported by THR, Esq., the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday upheld a 2013 ruling that the heirs of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel relinquished their claim to the character in a 2001 settlement with DC, and therefore are not able to terminate the copyright.

This legal dispute has proved as resilient as the Man of Steel, so we won’t label this a “definitive judgment.” However, the Siegel family would appear to have few options left beyond a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court. For now at least, Superman remains in the hands of Warner Bros. and DC."

How Copyright Terms Restrict Scholarship; Pacific Standard, 2/17/15

Noah Bertlatsky, Pacific Standard; How Copyright Terms Restrict Scholarship:

"Copyright in the United States is supposed "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries," according to the Constitution. Yet, in the case of the early Marston and Peter comics, copyright appears to have failed. DC is not keeping the comics in print: So, in order to read the complete run of Wonder Woman in her two comics (Wonder Woman and Sensation Comics) for my research, I had to find unlicensed digital editions. Without piracy, my book would have been impossible to complete."

Supreme Court won’t intervene in Shuster-DC fight over Superman; ComicBookResources.com, 10/6/14

Kevin Melrose, ComicBookResources.com; Supreme Court won’t intervene in Shuster-DC fight over Superman:

"The U.S. Supreme Court this morning declined to intervene in the copyright dispute between the Joe Shuster Estate and DC Comics, effectively ending the long, and frequently bitter, battle over who owns Superman.

By denying the estate’s petition, the justices let stand a November 2013 ruling by the Ninth Circuit that Shuster’s nephew is prevented by a 1992 agreement with DC from reclaiming the artist’s stake in the first Superman story under a clause of the 1976 U.S. Copyright Act.

At issue was a now 22-year-old deal in which the Shuster estate relinquished all claims to the property in exchange for “more than $600,000 and other benefits,” which included paying Shuster’s debts following his death earlier that year and providing his sister Jean Peavy and brother Frank Shuster with a $25,000 annual pension."

DC wins ‘final’ appeal in long battle over Superman rights; ComicBookResources.com, 11/22/13

Kevin Melrose, ComicBookResources.com; DC wins ‘final’ appeal in long battle over Superman rights: "As Deadline reports, in a 2-1 vote the Ninth Circuit on Thursday tied up the loose ends in what it describes as “the long-running saga regarding the ownership of copyrights in Superman — a story almost as old as the Man of Steel himself,” reaffirming an October 2012 ruling that the Shuster estate is prevented from reclaiming the artist’s stake in the character by a 20-year-old agreement with DC."

Superheros [sic] Tangle in Copyright Battles; New York Times, 7/23/10

Michael Cieply, New York Times; Superheros [sic] Tangle in Copyright Battles:

"Lawyers on a Friday afternoon panel at Comic-Con were supposed to be talking about the legal challenges of social media and the battles over copyright, notably a case that involves the Walt Disney Company’s Marvel Entertainment and the heirs to the comic book artist Jack Kirby (Spider-Man among many others).

But David P. Branfman, a lawyer on the stage, first had a word of warning for anybody whose Web site carries stock photos that might belong to someone else: “Make 100 percent sure you’ve got a written license” to use the pictures, said Mr. Branfman.

Companies that own stock photos, he said, have been cracking down on sites that use their wares, demanding, in his experience, an average of $15,000 for each photo lifted from them.

That was certainly an attention-getter for the Web-friendly Comic-Con crowd. Many in the room had just raised their hands, to acknowledge having photos on sites of their own.

Moving on to the main event, Mr. Branfman and his fellow panelists said they were amazed at their ferocity on display in the disputes between Marvel and the Kirby heirs, and between Warner’s DC Comics unit and the heirs to a pair of Superman creators, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, .

“You don’t see that too often,” Mr. Branfman said of a recent move by Warner to file suit personally against Marc Toberoff, the lawyer who has represented heirs in both the DC and the Marvel cases.

Michael Lovitz, a lawyer who moderated the panel, suggested that attempts by the Kirby and Siegel heirs to regain ownership of copyrights would open the floodgates to similar moves by a host of comic book creators. “This is something we’re going to see more and more of, these terminations,” he said.

To judge by the crush of attendees who afterward grabbed for a written rundown on copyright termination from Mr. Branfman — he called it “The Legal Undead” — Mr. Lovitz would appear to be right."

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/23/superheros-tangle-in-copyright-battles/?scp=1&sq=copyright&st=cse

Superman Creator's Heirs Win Rights to Early Stories; Am Law Litigation Daily, 8/14/09

Ross Todd via Am Law Litigation Daily; Superman Creator's Heirs Win Rights to Early Stories:

"A federal district court judge in Riverside, Calif., ruled Wednesday that the heirs of Superman cocreator Jerry Siegel are co-owners of copyrights to the first two weeks of Superman daily newspaper strips and other early Superman material. The ruling is the latest in an ongoing dispute between the heirs and DC Comics and Warner Brothers.

Judge Stephen Larson's decision allows the Siegels to recapture stories of Superman's origins on planet Krypton, his launch as a baby into space, and his crash-landing on Earth. Warner Brothers and DC still own copyrights to other elements of the Superman character, including his ability to fly, some other superpowers, the term "kryptonite," and the villain Lex Luthor. Here's a copy of Larson's 92-page decision."

http://www.law.com/jsp/tal/digestTAL.jsp?id=1202433059625

Court Rules DC & WB Didn't Violate Superman Licensing Agreement w/ Siegels; ComicBooksResources.com, 7/9/09

ComicBooksResources.com; Court Rules DC & WB Didn't Violate Superman Licensing Agreement w/ Siegels:

"Another court decision has been made in the Siegel family’s tense relationship with DC Comics. By virtue of previous decisions, the heirs of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel have been co-owners with DC Comics of the Superman copyright from 1999 until now. In 2008, the Siegels alleged that DC, in licensing the Superman characters to Warner Bros. Entertainment for audiovisual projects including “Smallville” and “Superman Returns,” violated the terms of their profit-sharing agreement.

The plaintiffs felt that because Warner Bros. Entertainment and DC Comics are both part of the same corporate entity, the licensing fees paid to DC Comics in the period between 1999 and 2002 (for the aforementioned "Smallville" and "Superman Returns" projects) were below market value. Essentially, the Siegels argued that DC Comics gave Warner Bros. Entertainment a "sweetheart deal," which would result in DC (and due to their co-ownership, the Siegels) not receiving as much money as they would in a traditionally “fair market deal.”

In today’s decision, the court ruled that DC and Warner Bros. Entertainment did indeed participate in a “fair market deal,” and that the Siegels are not entitled to any payments beyond the terms of the audiovisual licenses as they presently stand."

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=21944