LEE SEEKS @ LEAST $10 MILLION FROM MARVEL [Archive]

View Full Version : LEE SEEKS @ LEAST $10 MILLION FROM MARVEL

MattBrady

11-13-2002, 10:52 AM

<img src="http://classic.newsarama.com/Creators/stan2.jpg" width="147" height="198" align="right">Following up on the <a href="http://classic.newsarama.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=000053" target="_blank"> report</a> yesterday that Stan Lee has filed a lawsuit against Marvel, alleging that the publisher has embarked upon a “shameful scheme” to prevent him from participating in the commercial success of his creations, Newsarama has acquired a copy of the complaint in which Lee is seeking damages of at least $10 million.

The complaint states that, having been employed by the company since 1939, Marvel was built upon the wings of Lee’s creations, and as such, Lee placed his trust and confidence in the publisher, “ultimately entering into a profit sharing venture with Defendants for the exploitation of his creations. He not only relied upon Defendants to provide a home for his creations, but also upon their integrity and commitment to him and his life’s work.”

According to the complaint, the Defendants have failed and refused to honor their commitments to him, and as such Lee is bringing suit against Marvel Enterprises and Marvel Characters, seeking damages for their alleged breach of contractual obligations to “pay or properly and regularly account to Mr. :Lee a participation equal to 10% of the profits derived from them from productions utilizing Marvel characters in television or movies and ancillary rights, including the X-Men and Spider-Man films and television shows. Mr. Lee also seeks equitable relief in the form of a declaration of Mr. Lee’s rights under their contract, an order directing Defendants to specifically perform their obligations of good faith and fair dealing, and to properly account to Mr. Lee for their profits.”

The complaint continues by giving facts common to all claims of relief, including a brief biography of Lee’s association with Marvel, explaining how Lee started as an office errand boy, and eventual became the Publisher of Marvel. “Now that the Defendants have hit the ‘jackpot’ with the hugely successful film Spider-Man and anticipate similar successes with planned films and television productions,” the complaint continues, “they are refusing to honor their commitments to Mr. Lee.”

According to the facts listed in the complaint, the specific agreement which Lee is suing over was entered between Lee and Marvel on November 1st, 1998, which guaranteed continued employment with Marvel for Lee for life, while allowing Marvel to continue to exploit his name and characters. As part of the agreement, Lee was entitled to share in the profits from any live action or animated television or movie production based on Marvel characters, as well as profits from the exploitation of ancillary rights associated with such film or television productions, including toys.

The above is key to the lawsuit – in filing the lawsuit, Lee is not claiming, as other creators have done before him in recent years, that he is the legitimate creator of the characters, and therefore can reverse the copyright transfer and once again claim the characters as his own. Bluntly, this suit has nothing to do with creators’ rights – while Steve Ditko and Jack Kirby advocates would, rightly so, insist that both artists (among others) had significant input on the creation of Marvel’s most popular and enduring characters which are now associated with Lee, this lawsuit is about an alleged breach of contract between Marvel and Lee wherein the publisher was to pay Lee, according to the agreement, 10% of profits realized by the characters.

The agreement between Marvel and Lee which was entered into in 1998 was non-exclusive, and paid the creator, at it’s start $810,000 a year. The amount paid to Lee increased annually, with the final increase going into effect on November 1st, 2002. At that time, Lee would be, and presumably is currently paid $1 million a year by Marvel for the remainder of his life.

As part of the agreement, the complaint states that Lee gave over 60 television, radio, and magazine interviews, as well as speeches to promote Marvel and Marvel characters. Additionally, Lee worked with Marvel creative staff, advising when needed, and consulted with motion picture and television show producers to stimulate their licensing of Marvel characters.

As stated in previous <a href="http://classic.newsarama.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=000036" target="_blank"> articles</a>, the agreement required Marvel to pay 10% of profits from televisions or movie projects to Lee, as well as held Marvel accountable and responsible for all accounting of the monies owed to Lee.

<img src="http://classic.newsarama.com/Marvel/Spiderman_movie.jpg" width="175" height="193" align="left">The complaint then goes on to document the success of the Spider-Man movie, as well as how the film and licensing revenue has affect Marvel’s bottom line in a positive manner. The complaint alleges that Marvel has received and will receive profits from the film, as well as a 50/50 joint venture for all Spider-Man movie merchandising. The complaint points to press releases and financial documents from Marvel which stated that the company’s substantial gains in net sales and earnings were driven largely by the company-wide contribution from its Spider-Man franchise.

Based on Marvel’s financial disclosures, the complaint estimates that Marvel will receive $60-$90 million within the coming year, and are obligated to pay Lee substantial sums on account of his participation in the agreement.

According to the complaint, Defendants have “advised Mr. Lee that they have not received any profits from these productions and their ancillary rights and that by their reading of the Agreement, they do not expect there will be any ‘profits’ under paragraph 4(f) ‘in the foreseeable future.’ Accordingly, they have not made any payments to Mr. Lee in accordance with this provision.”

The complaint also alleges that Marvel will realize a tremendous windfall generated by revenues from the upcoming Daredevil, X-Men, and Hulk films, and will continue to reap benefits as these properties are exploited further in the coming years.

The first claim for relief states that, as Lee believes Marvel has breached their agreement with him, he has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial, but no less than $10 million for X-Men and Spider-Man alone.

The second claim for relief seeks damages for breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing, and claims that Marvel in effect, took advantage of the trust that Lee had placed in them to fairly account for and pay him the profits he was owed, according to the agreement he had with the company. The claim again states that, due to the breach, Lee has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial, but no less than $10 million.

The third claim for relief claims that Marvel has breached their contract with Lee and requests that they be forced to both pay Lee and properly provide an accounting of the profits they have derived from the exploitation of the characters. Additionally, the claim requests that Marvel be compelled to pay Lee 10% of profits in the future.

The complaint’s fourth claim requests a declaratory judgment against Marvel.

Lee’s agreement with Marvel is attached to the complaint as an Exhibit, and requires that Lee work for Marvel 10-15 hours per week. Lee’s services for Marvel, according to the agreement consist of:

a) serving as a spokesman for Marvel
b) conferring on a regular basis with Marvel’s creative staff.
c) Work with motion picture and television production groups to stimulate their use of Marvel characters.

Additionally, the agreement carries a clause which states that after November 1st, 2002, if Lee personally (or any company wholly owned or controlled by Lee) receives revenue from competing business activities, then Marvel shall be entitled to set-off from the amounts paid as base salary ($1 million a year) in an amount equal to 25% of such competing business revenue to a maximum of $190,000 in any contract year. As such, Lee is required to provide a certified accountant’s statement to Marvel, showing his income from any other business ventures.

This would, assumedly, affect Lee only if he is working for another comic book company, as he did with DC on the Just Imagine Stan Lee Creating… series. If Lee was paid in full for his work on the series before November 1st, he would not, according to the agreement, have any set-offs in his base salary.

Also, the agreement called for Lee to be reimbursed for business expenses, such as travel, limousine service and stays at luxury hotels.

The agreement also allowed Lee to continue writing the syndicated Spider-Man cartoon strip, for which he receives $125,000 a year.

The crux of the agreement for Marvel states that in exchange for the preceding, Lee would grant to Marvel all rights, titles, and interests for all work he has ever done for the publisher, including scripts, designs, plots, characters, or outlines. In signing the agreement, Lee promised that he would never file for copyright or trademark on any characters, and would never claim rights to any characters he created for Marvel.

KingStalin

11-13-2002, 11:03 AM

ok. My question is I didn't knoiw the spidey strip was still being made. Can someone tell me what's been happening in it?

hateboi

11-13-2002, 11:07 AM

Can you post a copy of the actual complaint (maybe in .pdf)? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

MattBrady

11-13-2002, 11:10 AM

[quote]Originally posted by hateboi:
Can you post a copy of the actual complaint (maybe in .pdf)? :confused: <hr></blockquote>

working on it, but the crux is there.

MattB

Disraeli Gears

11-13-2002, 11:19 AM

"Lee placed his trust and confidence in the publisher, “ultimately entering into a profit sharing venture with Defendants for the exploitation of his creations. He not only relied upon Defendants to provide a home for his creations, but also upon their integrity and commitment to him and his life’s work.”

Bullshit. Lee did work for hire. It appears his attorneys have adopted his crappy writing style to gloss over the truth.

Dumb.

11-13-2002, 11:23 AM

Stan Lee, the Vince McMahon of the comics world (except without the rape allegations, drug trials, and being honest I don't think it's likely that Kirby died as a result of a mixture of steroid, HGH, and pain-killer abuse that gets so many wrestlers but... actually Stan is absolutely nothing like McMahon.)

Dumb.

pop1280

11-13-2002, 11:23 AM

[quote]Originally posted by KingStalin:
ok. My question is I didn't knoiw the spidey strip was still being made. Can someone tell me what's been happening in it?<hr></blockquote>

Read it on the web every day at:

<a href="http://www.kingfeatures.com/features/comics/spidermn/about.htm" target="_blank">http://www.kingfeatures.com/features/comics/spidermn/about.htm</a>

Jeffbot

11-13-2002, 11:26 AM

[quote]Originally posted by KingStalin:
ok. My question is I didn't knoiw the spidey strip was still being made. Can someone tell me what's been happening in it?<hr></blockquote>

Nothing too substantial. Right now they're doing a 'flashback' sequence to when Peter was trying to date Mary Jane (obviously because of the movie recognition).

I believe Stan's brother, Larry Leiber, still draws the daily strip, while Alex Sauvik (formerly of Web of Spider-Man) does the Sunday edition.

125,000 dollars just for the newspaper strip - wow...

MattBrady

11-13-2002, 11:29 AM

[quote]Originally posted by Disraeli Gears:
Lee did work for hire. It appears his attorneys have adopted his crappy writing style to gloss over the truth.<hr></blockquote>

Again, this suit has nothing to do with any rights concenring the creation of the characters, only the 1998 agreement and what was agreed to between Lee and Marvel therein.

MattB

Hank Wirtz

11-13-2002, 11:30 AM

[quote]Originally posted by KingStalin:
ok. My question is I didn't knoiw the spidey strip was still being made. Can someone tell me what's been happening in it?<hr></blockquote>

They keep a month's worth of strips (delayed by two weeks) on display <a href="http://www.kingfeatures.com/features/comics/spidermn/about.htm" target="_blank">at the King Features website.</a>

AnthonyL

11-13-2002, 11:36 AM

See, now I dont agree with this at all.

At first, I was like "Well, if they broke their contract with him, then he deserves the 10 percent"

But Lee isnt going after ten percent..he's going for millions of dollars.

And that's just not right. Did he do a lot of interviews and promotions? Sure he did. But that's why he's getting paid 1 million for life....right? I mean, does he expect to just get a million for free and do nothing?

Ugh. If the man would of just gone after the contractual agreement, I would still be rooting for him...but this, this is greedy.

One could argue "But Marvel Makes Billions off of his creations! He deserves it!" Well, sure, but you know, HE MAKES A MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR FOR LIFE.

I didnt read anywhere in his contract that said he needs 20 million dollars owed to him by Marvel.

10 percent Stan, 10 percent. That's all you initially claimed. Then you added in toys and such. Now you're going for life-long dues owed.

Man, and to think I defended him by saying he's NOT greedy.

I humbly apologize to those that knew better than me, and will endevour in the future to not comment until the full situation is realized.

Anthony L

manosx

11-13-2002, 11:41 AM

So Marvel is saying that they have not made any profits off of Spider-Man and X-Men? Ok. I guess thay'll have to open their accounting books to prove it. I hope they havn't done antthing shady in those books, or it might be less expensive just to pay Lee off.

rundownthewayup

11-13-2002, 11:49 AM

I just can't understand why people are so greedy in the world nowadays. I mean, COME on, so maybe Marvel is making money hand over fist with their recent successes; it's taken them forever to just dig themselves out of the hole, anyway. And I'm NOT backing up Marvel here; I'm just saying, the man is making one MILLION dollars a year, for the rest of his life; and he's complaining! COME on! WHAT can you do with one MILLION dollars a year, that you need more? Greed, greed, greed. Meanwhile, "everyday people" try to scrounge up enough money between paychecks to pay the electricity bill. Sigh...

Aaron Weisbrod

11-13-2002, 11:52 AM

Matt,

Maybe I missed it somewhere along the line, but is there any word concerning who actually WROTE and/or AGREED TO the contract Lee signed (on Marvel's end, that is).

Curious,
Aaron Weisbrod

Marcus Ferrell

11-13-2002, 11:53 AM

[quote]But Lee isnt going after ten percent..he's going for millions of dollars.<hr></blockquote>Ten percent is millions of dollars.

[quote]Then you added in toys and such.<hr></blockquote>Toys might be in the contract. We wouldn't know without reading the original contract.

John Osen

11-13-2002, 12:02 PM

I humbly apologize to those that knew better than me, and will endevour in the future to not comment until the full situation is realized.
AnthonyL

I appreciate this statement, but you and others really blasted Blues Brother with personal attacks including name calling and bad language. I would like to see a more civil tone in the future.
:D

MattBrady

11-13-2002, 12:02 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Aaron Weisbrod:
Maybe I missed it somewhere along the line, but is there any word concerning who actually WROTE and/or AGREED TO the contract Lee signed (on Marvel's end, that is).<hr></blockquote>

William H. Hardie III, a vice president at the time.

MattB

Academic

11-13-2002, 12:10 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Matt Brady:
[QBThe crux of the agreement for Marvel states that in exchange for the preceding, Lee would grant to Marvel all rights, titles, and interests for all work he has ever done for the publisher, including scripts, designs, plots, characters, or outlines. In signing the agreement, Lee promised that he would never file for copyright or trademark on any characters, and would never claim rights to any characters he created for Marvel.[/QB]<hr></blockquote>

A crux indeed. Marvel's paying $1 million/year to Stan while he's alive is certainly a good investment when you consider that Stan, under the new copyright clause in the US, could -- in about a decade -- walk into court and walk away with at least half the rights to 90% of the company's key characters. Then, Marvel would have to negotiate with Stan to allow them to use those characters... or he could take them over to another company and do what he wants with them as well.

hiphophead

11-13-2002, 12:13 PM

Regardless of how some of us may feel about the rights and wrongs of Stan Lee getting paid a million a year for life and then going after more. We must consider if we were in his position and signed a contract, we would be after our 10 percent too.

Unfortunately Kirby, Ditko and the rest did not and do not have the contrac that Stan Lee has. If they did, I am sure they would be trying to reap their booty too.

If I were Marvel I would look into seeing the current relationship between the then vice-president (William H. Hardie III) and Stan Lee now. That would be their only defense IMO>

Rich Johnston

11-13-2002, 12:14 PM

KACH

11-13-2002, 12:18 PM

"20 Million Dollars!"-- puts pinky to lip . . .

Funny, that's just about the amlunt that Lee lost duing his internet media endeavor.

Y'know, I don't know enough about the legal system to really say who I think is right & who is wrong, but why wasn't Stan making such a stink when Blade & X-Men first debuted in the theaters?? :confused:

I've lost a bit of respect for him because of this.

--J.

Matt McLean

11-13-2002, 12:38 PM

I wonder how businesses stay in business when they make follish mistakes like these. I am happy to see that Lee is following the failed footsteps of so many other creators. And I am happy to see that Marvel decided in honoring Lee with this generous contract.

Now... from a purly business standpoint... I would say you are insane for giving Lee that contract. $1 million dollars a year sure, since Lee is the spokesman for Marvel, but profit sharing?!? :confused: Has no one learned anything in this world? Back in 1998, Marvel was fully aware of future potential of lincensing of movies and what-not, everyone should know that that 10% is going to come back and bite you on the ass. Oh look, it has.

This is anything knew... businesses sign these stupid contacts thinking that this is the only way creators will work with them. And then the businesses are arrogant enough to claim that there's no profit, never was. "Excuse me, didn't this movie make over $400 million just in the US?"

"Appartently it really cost over $1 billion dollars to produce and market. So you see there is no profit." Wow... way to run a business there Marvel.

If only Lee was successful in buying Marvel. Then everyone could be happy.

Cliffy

11-13-2002, 12:57 PM

[quote]Originally posted by hiphophead:
Irregardless of how some of us may feel about the rights and wrongs of Stan Lee getting paid a million a year for life and then going after more. We must consider if we were in his position and signed a contract, we would be after our 10 percent too.<hr></blockquote>

Absolutely right.

Except, "irregardless" isn't a word. You should have written "regardless." ;)

--Cliffy

Nat Gertler

11-13-2002, 01:01 PM

[quote]Originally posted by KACH:
why wasn't Stan making such a stink when Blade & X-Men first debuted in the theaters??<hr></blockquote>Blade and X-Men were reportedly licensed for lump-sum payments, which in the case of Blade was almost certainly paid before the signing of this contract (since the film was released before this contract) and in the case of X-Men may have been as well. In any case, the amounts of money at hand were smaller, which would have made a lawsuit (which is apt to be expensive) less worthwhile. This year, three Marvel films were released -- Spider-Man, Blade II, Men In Black II. That adds up.

Falkner

11-13-2002, 01:02 PM

People,
This has NOTHING to do with greed. It is about honoring a contract. Who wouldn't demand money that was legally promised to them?

I hate to see money come out of Marvel's pocket too but IF that 10% was never theirs to begin with, then they shouldn't keep it.

If Stan & Marvel did indeed sign a contract stating the above, what I want to know is how in the hell Stan pulled that off. It's a friggin' SWEET deal...and Marvel only seemed willing to pay an annual salary in the past. All the more stupid on Marvel's part is if Sony had already acquired the Spidey license in 1998 (though I think it was '99).

D.J. Coffman is your daddy

11-13-2002, 01:11 PM

NEWSFLASHD.J. Coffman seeks 1 million dollars from Stan Lee..not yearly, just like once.. well, Uh, I know I don't have a contract, but shoot, someone throw me down a few bones. All these millions thrown around- Share the love people!-- In return for the one million dollars, I'll never say anything bad or out of context/childish about stan lee again.. I mean, c'mon that's worth a million or two!

D.J. Coffman is your daddy

11-13-2002, 01:13 PM

PS-- My request for 1million dollars has nothign to do with greed, or contracts, just my own personal wants and needs. They don't owe me anything. But I'm asking anyway.

hjcho

11-13-2002, 01:23 PM

I can only imagine that Jack is literally turning in his grave, and that Steve Ditko and others ain't too happy either. I find the juxtaposition of this story and the Joe Simon/ Cap lawsuit appeal very ironic.

San

11-13-2002, 01:44 PM

Well, maybe it's just honouring a contract...so maybe legally Stan is entitled to ten million dollars.

Three things though:

1) Whoever agreed to that 10% clause on the Marvel side is a total idiot.

2) When a company already pays you one million a year for doing a VERY cushy job, and you're sueing them for ten million more just, you know, beause it's in the contract, you're greedy.

3) Why now and not before? Cause if he did it before he would have got WAY less, and this ten % deal with Marvel would have ended after the lawsuit. But NOW there's money to get, let's play the "righteous ex-employee" part.

So yeah, legally he's probably right. Feh.

San

Cliffy

11-13-2002, 01:50 PM

[quote]Originally posted by hjcho:
I can only imagine that Jack is literally turning in his grave...<hr></blockquote>

Unlikely -- unless there's some excavation work nearby. ;)

--Cliffy

urthworm

11-13-2002, 01:50 PM

just for people saying that Stan is being greedy here, it's worth noting that he's pretty old and more likely thinking not of how he's going to spend the money he's entitled to, but how he can use it to provide for his family after he's gone...

D.J. Coffman is your daddy

11-13-2002, 02:06 PM

Good points all around. It's definitly NOT about greed.... I still say someone, Marvel, maybe Stan, someone with millions should just give me 1 million, just because I could really use that. :cool:

ZOD

11-13-2002, 02:06 PM

[quote]Originally posted by John Doe:
I humbly apologize to those that knew better than me, and will endevour in the future to not comment until the full situation is realized.
AnthonyL

I appreciate this statement, but you and others really blasted Blues Brother with personal attacks including name calling and bad language. I would like to see a more civil tone in the future.
:D <hr></blockquote>

What happened to "I'll still get my comics news here, but if I want to read or write intelligent commentary, I'm going to <a href="http://elayneriggs.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://elayneriggs.blogspot.com/</a> from now on. Peace. I'm out."? Change your name all you want, you're still the same dumb ****.

ZOD

hiphophead

11-13-2002, 02:40 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Cliffy:


Except, "irregardless" isn't a word. You should have written "regardless." ;)

--Cliffy<hr></blockquote>

Ebonically speaking it is :D

Nat Gertler

11-13-2002, 02:53 PM

[quote]Originally posted by San:
2) When a company already pays you one million a year for doing a VERY cushy job, and you're sueing them for ten million more just, you know, beause it's in the contract, you're greedy.<hr></blockquote>Remember that the next time you think someone owes you money. (Or will you think that it's the person who isn't paying you who is greedy?)
[quote]3) Why now and not before? Cause if he did it before he would have got WAY less, and this ten % deal with Marvel would have ended after the lawsuit.<hr></blockquote>It would have ended? Why? This is a lifetime agreement. There's no clause that says "this contract is void if you actually try to collect money it promises you."
[quote]But NOW there's money to get, let's play the "righteous ex-employee" part.<hr></blockquote>Ex-employee? When did he become an ex-employee? He is still under contract.
[quote]So yeah, legally he's probably right. Feh.<hr></blockquote>So if he's legally right, you think he should be giving Marvel a multimillion dollar gift? Why?

Pariah

11-13-2002, 03:09 PM

“ultimately entering into a profit sharing venture with Defendants for the exploitation of his creations. He not only relied upon Defendants to provide a home for his creations, but also upon their integrity and commitment to him and his life’s work.”

I see a new comic super team coming out of all this... "The Defendants"! It could be a team of superhero lawyers that beats up everyone suing Marvel.

Aaron

11-13-2002, 03:27 PM

Good for Stan! I don't feel the least bit sorry for him, but that doesn't mean MArvel should get away with violating the terms of their agreement, either. It sets a bad precedent for those folks in the future who AREN'T Stan Lee.

The most interesting part of this story to me is the thought that Marvel might have to crack open the books and reveal possibly creative bookkeeping.

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if they settled out of court and then issued a press statement with Joe Q and Bill J saying great things about Good Ol' Stan and how it was all "a big misunderstanding" and how much they love and respect the guy.

Riiiiiiiiiiight.

Aaron

Greg O

11-13-2002, 04:38 PM

Given the 'deals a deal' nature of this suit and Marvels funding of Neil Gaiman in a similar case, they'll obviously apologise and settle with Stan ;)

GOD

San

11-13-2002, 05:03 PM

Remember that the next time you think someone owes you money. (Or will you think that it's the person who isn't paying you who is greedy?)

This is, of course, assuming that Marvel does owe Stan money.
And yeah, I think people who get a million a year for doing practically nothing shouldn't complain too much.
I don't know why Stan Lee should still get money anyway. He did his job, he got paid, other people write those characters now (and as far as I'm concerned, doing a far better job), let him be content with his million a year and vegetate away.

Ex-employee? When did he become an ex-employee? He is still under contract.

While doing the same work an ex-employee does. Well, maybe a BIT more. Barely.

So if he's legally right, you think he should be giving Marvel a multimillion dollar gift? Why?

He didn't contribute to Marvel's present "success". And building Marvel so many years ago (along with some others) isn't contributing. As far as I'm concerned, he's a leech.

Of course, somebody at Marvel probably was overawed at the chance of getting a signature of THE Stan and pushed a liftetime 10% deal contract under his nose. And if he now wants to exploit that stupidity, no one can or should stop him. Doesn't change my point though.

San

xmikex4

11-13-2002, 05:16 PM

Sorry to get off topic but everytime that anyone mentions Stan Lee they say that he "co-created" Spiderman, Hulk, etc... Which is kind of funny because they also say that Sony "co-created" the compact disc when all they really did was buy it from Philips. So what I was wondering was - did Stan Lee really truly create these characters or was he just the guy who looked at the "work in progress" Spiderman and said- "I don't like those blue gloves, change that. Make them red or something."

Nat Gertler

11-13-2002, 05:28 PM

[quote]Originally posted by San:
And yeah, I think people who get a million a year for doing practically nothing shouldn't complain too much.<hr></blockquote>Do you think people who are being ripped off for millions shouldn't complain? Or is it okay to take from the unpoor to give to the corporation.
[quote]I don't know why Stan Lee should still get money anyway.<hr></blockquote>Because he has an agreement with Marvel to that effect. I don't see why it needs any more reason than that.
[quote]So if he's legally right, you think he should be giving Marvel a multimillion dollar gift? Why?

He didn't contribute to Marvel's present "success".<hr></blockquote>
1) I didn't contribute to Marvel's present "success"; am I expected to give them a multi-million dollar gift as well?

2) It's hard to see how Stan didn't contribute to Marvel's present "success", seeing how the most blatant portion of that success is a movie based on characters that Stan co-created, with storylines taken write from Stan's writings, in a film that Stan quite probably took meetings to help arrange for, which he definitely helped promote, which he appears in, which he is credited as an executive producer, a film which is now available in forms that include interviews with Stan. But hey, if you take away Spider-Man, then you still have the film success of X-Men (a Stan Lee co-creation), the upcoming sequel to that plus the Incredible Hulk (a Stan Lee co-creation), and Daredevil (ditto), with various others in the works. Stan still writes the most widely-read Spider-Man comics material.
[quote]Of course, somebody at Marvel probably was overawed at the chance of getting a signature of THE Stan and pushed a liftetime 10% deal contract under his nose.<hr></blockquote>Rrrrright. Because after all, people at Marvel couldn't mean Stan some other way, right?

JimHughs4

11-13-2002, 05:34 PM

Uatu

11-13-2002, 05:59 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Falkner:
People,
This has NOTHING to do with greed. It is about honoring a contract. <hr></blockquote>

I agree. Stan Lee never struck me as a greedy cat. I think he is more about getting his just desserts. I mean, the man was the guiding force behind the most enduring of comic book universes. If Marvel was stupid enough to say they would give him 10% of all their profits on his characters, they are getting what they deserve. I mean, Spider-Man alone has got to be worth about a billion dollars (three movies, comic books, merchandise, video games, cartoons, etc, etc). What the hell were they thinking. And all I can say to Stan Lee is "Excelsior" for pulling off such a sweet heart deal.

fujishig

11-13-2002, 06:01 PM

Hmm... interesting arguments. But if Marvel did sign the contract, they should have to pay, regardless of public opinion and whether Stan actually needs the money or not. It's entitled to him.

Although I also agree that the contract is ridiculous. Basically, they paid him a million dollars a year to work for DC (minus 1/4 of his earnings there). I don't know if his DC series actually did well (i certainly didn't buy it), but DC got to get a major Marvel icon to work with them and Marvel was paying him at the time.

I do wonder if he was putting his 10-15 hours a week of work in, though. True, his responsibilities aren't tremendous, but it seems like his contract is contingent on him doing something for Marvel.

Was this tact that Marvel takes that the movie didn't make any money for them common knowledge already? I know they only get a portion of the net profits, but it was my understanding that the movie greatly helped them with last years earnings declaration.

John Osen

11-13-2002, 06:16 PM

What if Captain America went to DC? Hmm...That would be cool! Say he was blown up by the Red Skull! The explosion sends him to the another universe where he is rescued from an icy coffin by Aquaman, Wonder Woman, Superman and Batman (riding in the JLA submarine)!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aquaman wouldn't need the sub. He could rescue Cap on his own, and they could get someone like Firestorm to form the new Invaders
:D

Uatu

11-13-2002, 06:17 PM

[quote]Originally posted by xmikex4:
Sorry to get off topic but everytime that anyone mentions Stan Lee they say that he "co-created" Spiderman, Hulk, etc... Which is kind of funny because they also say that Sony "co-created" the compact disc when all they really did was buy it from Philips. So what I was wondering was - did Stan Lee really truly create these characters or was he just the guy who looked at the "work in progress" Spiderman and said- "I don't like those blue gloves, change that. Make them red or something."<hr></blockquote>

One thing I do know for sure is that Stan Lee was credited as writer on the first 100 issues of Amazing and more than the first 100 issues of Fantastic Four, plus he had pretty long runs on the vast majority of all the titles Marvel was putting out in the 60s.

I've been hearing some talk on this board that he didn't handle the characters well, but I disagree wholeheartedly. If you want to see the absolute definition of who Spider-Man is and what he has been for the last 40 years, read Amazing #33, as one example. You want to read some good Stan Lee comics, read Amazing #90, or #96-98, and remember the context in which you are reading them (they are 30-something years old!) Read Fantastic Four #48-50, or #51 for that matter. I think Stan Lee was one of the most influential forces in humanizing comic book characters, and these stories all support that supposition.

Is Stan corny? Yeah, sure, the man was writing comic books in the 1960s for pete's sake. Look at what was going on in Batman and Superman during the same time period, and you tell me that Stan Lee isn't a great creator.

I really think everyone should give the man some respect.

San

11-13-2002, 06:27 PM

Do you think people who are being ripped off for millions shouldn't complain? Or is it okay to take from the unpoor to give to the corporation.

If he is indeed being ripped off.

Because he has an agreement with Marvel to that effect.

He says.

1) I didn't contribute to Marvel's present "success"; am I expected to give them a multi-million dollar gift as well?

Nope. Should Marvel pay you ten million dollars because you didn't contribute?

2) It's hard to see how Stan didn't contribute to Marvel's present "success", seeing how the most blatant portion of that success is a movie based on characters that Stan co-created, with storylines taken write from Stan's writings, in a film that Stan quite probably took meetings to help arrange for, which he definitely helped promote, which he appears in, which he is credited as an executive producer, a film which is now available in forms that include interviews with Stan. But hey, if you take away Spider-Man, then you still have the film success of X-Men (a Stan Lee co-creation), the upcoming sequel to that plus the Incredible Hulk (a Stan Lee co-creation), and Daredevil (ditto), with various others in the works. Stan still writes the most widely-read Spider-Man comics material.

Guess what. I'm the one paying to read and view all that. Which makes me about as responsible for Marvel's success as Stan Lee. Where's my ten million bucks?

San

MattBrady

11-13-2002, 07:16 PM

[quote]Originally posted by San:
Because he has an agreement with Marvel to that effect.

He says.
<hr></blockquote>

Well, so does Marvel, in effect, by stating the relevant terms of the agreement in their SEC filing.

The provision from Lee’s employment agreement being cited [under the Expenses/Fringe Benefits section] reads:

“f) In addition, you shall be paid participation equal to 10% of the profits derived during your life by Marvel (including subsidiaries and affiliates) from the profits of any live action or animation television or movie (including ancillary rights) productions utilizing Marvel characters. This participation is not to be derived from the fee charged by Marvel for the licensing of the product or of the characters for merchandise or otherwise. Marvel will compute, account and pay to you your participation due, if any, on account of said profits, for the annual period ending each March 31 during your life, on an annual basis within a reasonable time after the end of each such period.”

The case won't be determined by whether or not Stan is outright lying about the deal, but most likely by the accounting details from Marvel, but no one is arguing (neither Lee nor Marvel) that the agreement does in fact, exist.

MattB

Nat Gertler

11-13-2002, 07:21 PM

[quote]Originally posted by San:
He says.<hr></blockquote>He, Marvel, and the Securities And Exchange Commission. You can read the agreement online at the SEC website: <a href="http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/933730/000093373002000013/ex10-110q902.txt" target="_blank">http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/933730/000093373002000013/ex10-110q902.txt</a>

[quote]Should Marvel pay you ten million dollars because you didn't contribute?<hr></blockquote>No, but if Marvel promises me ten million dollars and gets effort out of me for it, then they darned well better pay.
[quote]Guess what. I'm the one paying to read and view all that.<hr></blockquote>The one? Gee, you must be rich, being the one to spend $800 million watching the Spider-Man movie, buying all those comics, and buying all those DVDs. [quote]Which makes me about as responsible for Marvel's success as Stan Lee.<hr></blockquote>Now, exactly which 60 years of your life did you spend toiling for, building, and promoting Marvel?

And tell me, what does qualify as building success, if it doesn't include creating, crafting, building, promoting, and deal-making?

[quote]Where's my ten million bucks?<hr></blockquote>Maybe if you had gone to see the movie a few million less times, or bought a few million less DVDs, you'd still have it.

San

11-13-2002, 07:36 PM

*grin* I stand corrected, he should definitely get 10%. Still says nowhere that that equals ten million dollars.

Besides, I already stated that if Marvel was so stupid to make that agreement, they should indeed pay up.

But I still think that even sixty years of achievement (not my choice of words) is worth paying ten million dollars for. In my uncapitalistic mind, there's no job on the friggin planet worth that insane amount of money.

San

San

11-13-2002, 07:40 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Matt Brady:


The case won't be determined by whether or not Stan is outright lying about the deal, but most likely by the accounting details from Marvel, but no one is arguing (neither Lee nor Marvel) that the agreement does in fact, exist.

MattB<hr></blockquote>

My bad. I wonder if the current Marvel bosses are furiously stabbing voodoodolls of the old ones right now.

San

egads

11-13-2002, 07:41 PM

Did Marvel make that much money on X-Men and Blade ? That's bigger news to me. You will not hear any complaints from me here, a deal is a deal. I just think people need to recognize that he wont be seeing any Spidey movie money until March of next year, since the movie came out before March of this year. If not this year, expect Stan to get a big fat paycheck in about months.

egads

11-13-2002, 07:43 PM

One more thing, how did Quesadda and Jemas get involved in this discussion? They had nothing to do with the contract, and at least Quesada had nothing to do with Stan not getting money. I guess people just like to stick it to them, no matter what.

Furthermore, hell yeah you would expect them )joe and Bill) to spin doctor this. They are getting huge press about this, and Marvel is in fact a corporation. DC would be no different.

Nat Gertler

11-13-2002, 07:44 PM

[quote]Originally posted by San:
*grin* I stand corrected, he should definitely get 10%. Still says nowhere that that equals ten million dollars.<hr></blockquote>It is often true in cases like these that the plaintiff doesn't have access to all the numbers needed to make a precise claim; finding out the real numbers is part of the lawsuit process.
[quote]In my uncapitalistic mind, there's no job on the friggin planet worth that insane amount of money.<hr></blockquote>If your mind is so uncapitalistic, why do you care who gets the money? In fact, paying the workers the earnings is the "uncapitalistic" thing; otherwise, profits benefit the "capitalists", the investors who provide capital for the company.

OCM

11-13-2002, 08:52 PM

While Stan is indeed entitled to what is legally his, how much is his currently anyway?

As has been pointed out the monies for the spidey movie won't be his until next year, and how much did the Xmen and Blade movies garner in profit?

Didn't they sell those rights for a pittance IIRC?

Good thing for Marvel that their current movie deals are for a much better profit...

And Stan if you bother to read these boards, when you get whatever money is entitled to you, quit being so greedy and donate it to some worthy causes. I mean $1 million a year and the Spiderman strip isn't enough? I mean $300 plus a day for doing a 3 panel strip??????????? sheesh!

Aaron

11-13-2002, 09:44 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Uatu:

I mean, the man was the guiding force behind the most enduring of comic book universes. <hr></blockquote>

In the words of Samantha Stevens...

"Weeeeeeeeeeeellllllllllll!"

I don't for a second dismiss Stan's contributions to Marvel, but Marvel's hardly the "most enduring of comic book universes." Considering how close Marvel's come to disappearing off the map in the last decade, I think that honor clearly goes to DC. DC's been around much longer than Marvel and will probably outlast the company as well.

Aaron

Aaron

11-13-2002, 09:45 PM

[quote]Originally posted by fujishig:
Was this tact that Marvel takes that the movie didn't make any money for them common knowledge already? I know they only get a portion of the net profits, but it was my understanding that the movie greatly helped them with last years earnings declaration.<hr></blockquote>

I can't imagine the sense in Marvel investing so much time, energy and resources in the X-Men, Spider-Man, Daredevil and Hulk movies if they didn't get a red cent back. I mean, that just makes ZERO sense.

Aaron

Aaron

11-13-2002, 09:49 PM

[quote]Originally posted by San:

But I still think that even sixty years of achievement (not my choice of words) is worth paying ten million dollars for. In my uncapitalistic mind, there's no job on the friggin planet worth that insane amount of money.

San<hr></blockquote>

He wasn't building widgets for pete's sake. His creations will live on far, far past his lifetime and his work will continue to be profitable for much longer than he actually clocked in at Marvel. 10 Million Dollars is not nearly enough for that, in my mind.

Aaron

pifpog

11-13-2002, 10:42 PM

[quote]Originally posted by xmikex4:
Sorry to get off topic but everytime that anyone mentions Stan Lee they say that he "co-created" Spiderman, Hulk, etc... Which is kind of funny because they also say that Sony "co-created" the compact disc when all they really did was buy it from Philips. So what I was wondering was - did Stan Lee really truly create these characters or was he just the guy who looked at the "work in progress" Spiderman and said- "I don't like those blue gloves, change that. Make them red or something."<hr></blockquote>

People tend to write co-created out of respect for the others that were present at the birth of Marvel. Stan Lee was absolutely part of the creative process then -- he didn't get to the "evaluating glove color" stage until he stepped down as editor to become the publisher. There are lots of questions as to how much he contributed versus other people -- Did Kirby come up with the name Spider-man? How much of the early stories were plotted by artists, with Lee providing the dialog? Are the Fantastic Four straight from Stan Lee's brain or a variation on the Challengers of the Unknown book that Kirby wrote just before helping save Marvel from bankrupcy (the first time)? But Stan Lee was absolutely an active force and certainly deserves the title "co-creator".

Nat Gertler

11-13-2002, 11:08 PM

[quote]Originally posted by OCM:
And Stan if you bother to read these boards, when you get whatever money is entitled to you, quit being so greedy and donate it to some worthy causes.<hr></blockquote>Excuse me, "OCM", but how do you know whether Stan donates to worthy causes?

OCM

11-14-2002, 02:22 AM

[quote]Originally posted by Nat Gertler:
Excuse me, "OCM", but how do you know whether Stan donates to worthy causes?<hr></blockquote>

You're right I don't. What are you his spokesperson or something "Nat Gertler"? Sheesh.

Anyway, with all the gazillion of articles out there about Stan i've actually never heard of him donating anything. But, perhaps he's a quiet type and says nothing about it.

HAHAHA sorry couldn't keep a straight face...

With great oodles of money comes a great responibility to help the less fortunate.

Help out D.J. Coffman Stan, the whiner needs it more than the rest of us. :)

DragynWulf

11-14-2002, 02:23 AM

[quote]Originally posted by AnthonyL:
See, now I dont agree with this at all.

At first, I was like "Well, if they broke their contract with him, then he deserves the 10 percent"

But Lee isnt going after ten percent..he's going for millions of dollars.

And that's just not right. Did he do a lot of interviews and promotions? Sure he did. But that's why he's getting paid 1 million for life....right? I mean, does he expect to just get a million for free and do nothing?

Ugh. If the man would of just gone after the contractual agreement, I would still be rooting for him...but this, this is greedy.

One could argue "But Marvel Makes Billions off of his creations! He deserves it!" Well, sure, but you know, HE MAKES A MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR FOR LIFE.

I didnt read anywhere in his contract that said he needs 20 million dollars owed to him by Marvel.

10 percent Stan, 10 percent. That's all you initially claimed. Then you added in toys and such. Now you're going for life-long dues owed.

Man, and to think I defended him by saying he's NOT greedy.

I humbly apologize to those that knew better than me, and will endevour in the future to not comment until the full situation is realized.
<hr></blockquote>

Tell me this, if you and a company signed a contract where it said that you would be paid 10% of whatever they made on a list of idems, then didn't pay you that 10% that was agreed on in that contract. Would you sue them or just keep your mouth shut and not get paid what they owe you based on that contract. You can't blame him because Marvel made the contract and Marvel's lawyers most likly wrote the contract and if they didn't write it then they looked over it with a microscope before someone from Marvel signed it.

So what if he is going after all the money made on toys, TV, cartoons, movies and other things. He is intitled to it because of the contract. That $1 million a year most likely covered all the toys and cartoons over the years, but now Marvel has had BLADE, BLADE II, X-MEN, SPIDER-MAN and will have X-MEN 2, HULK, and SPIDER-MAN 2 as well. 10% of all of that does not add up to $1 million and that is all he is asking for is his 10%.

D.J. Coffman is your daddy

11-14-2002, 10:08 AM

I just had a vision of Stan Lee going apeshit and being one of those disgruntled mailman types that goes locked and loaded into the marvel offices..... THAT would go down in history.. and him saying "Now I'm gonna take my 10% out of your asses, Excelsior!"------- Or "Make mine, Murder!"

AnthonyL

11-14-2002, 12:29 PM

[quote]Tell me this, if you and a company signed a contract where it said that you would be paid 10% of whatever they made on a list of idems, then didn't pay you that 10% that was agreed on in that contract. Would you sue them or just keep your mouth shut and not get paid what they owe you based on that contract.<hr></blockquote>

I would sue for my ten percent of PROFITS made on all the films and cartoons that MARVEL has made since 1998 that werent derived from liscensing fees. And I know it wouldnt be 20 million dollars, despite what Rich Johnston said. Marvel didnt make much of anything on Blade or X-men (or even Men in Black) because of stupid liscening agreements. Spider-Man is their first film that they actually saw profits on.

Anthony L

Scout99

11-14-2002, 12:56 PM

[quote]Originally posted by D.J. Coffman is your daddy:
I just had a vision of Stan Lee going apeshit and being one of those disgruntled mailman types that goes locked and loaded into the marvel offices..... THAT would go down in history.. and him saying "Now I'm gonna take my 10% out of your asses, Excelsior!"------- Or "Make mine, Murder!"<hr></blockquote>

That's a funny scene! But the feds would arrest Stan as a terrorist.

BTW, Stan doesn't deserve any money from the Blade films since he didn't create the character (Marv Wolfman and Gene Colan did). Neither from the MIB films (talk to Lowell Cunningham).

Cliffy

11-14-2002, 01:46 PM

[quote]Originally posted by San:
But I still think that even sixty years of achievement (not my choice of words) is worth paying ten million dollars for.<hr></blockquote>

But see, your opinion of what Lee's efforts are worth is completely irrelevant. As is mine. As is Neil Armstrong's. The only persons whose opinion means anything here are Stan Lee and Marvel Comics, Inc. Marvel has promised to pay 10%. That may well be an absurd price to pay. But they promised to pay it. Therefore, they owe it. Now, it's a difficult question exactly what that 10% is worth -- Lee says $10 Million, Marvel says $0, but if the court ultimately decides that it is indeed $10 Million, then your and my opinion as to whether that makes sense doesn't matter a whit, only that Marvel has already agreed that that was an acceptable price.

--Cliffy

John Osen

11-14-2002, 01:49 PM

quote:
AnthonyL, the word is whether. Weather is what you go outside in without an umbrella.

Dear god no! Not my spelling!!!

Spelling the word "weather" correctly when you meant to write "whether" is not a spelling error. You simply didn't know the difference between two words with completely different meanings. Now's the part where you respond "Get a life, Pointdexter" like you did with Blues Brother. Let the flaming begin.

terry

11-14-2002, 02:26 PM

Observer

11-14-2002, 02:38 PM

I'm confused. I just read a copy of what is purportedly Stan Lee's employment contract, and a clause reads that he will be paid 10% of the profits he earned during his life "from the profits of any live action or animation television or movie (including ancillary rights) productions utilizing Marvel characters." The same clause adds that this 10% will not have anything to do with "the fee charged by Marvel for the licensing of the product or of the characters for merchandise or otherwise." Did Lee already basically agree to not receive anything from whatever Sony, MTV or toy companies paid Marvel for the use of Spidey or other characters? That he will only receive, not 10% of what Marvel receives after Spider Man earns millions in theaters and Marvel gets a cut, but only 10% of whatever Marvel feels he earned during his life? Which could be interpreted as 10% of his salary?

egads

11-14-2002, 03:29 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Aaron:


In the words of Samantha Stevens...

"Weeeeeeeeeeeellllllllllll!"

I don't for a second dismiss Stan's contributions to Marvel, but Marvel's hardly the "most enduring of comic book universes." Considering how close Marvel's come to disappearing off the map in the last decade, I think that honor clearly goes to DC. DC's been around much longer than Marvel and will probably outlast the company as well.

Aaron<hr></blockquote>

Do you remember when Marvel almost bought all of the DC characters? I guess not....

Furthermore, you really think Marvel is going to drop off the side of the Earth? If ever they were going to go under, a big media company, much like WB before it became AOL/TimeWarner did. Maybe Sony will buy the rights to the characters. I really don't think Marvel is going anywhere.

Juliius

11-14-2002, 04:24 PM

Umm, all of you guys saying stuff like "NO ONE deserves that much money" and similar things, intimations that Stan Lee is greedy, etc...THINK!!

If Stan Lee doesn't get the money SOMEONE will. Do you honestly believe that the various execs and chair-people who run Marvel see no profits from these items (movies, cartoons, characters, etc.)? If they didn't they would be fools to continue on.

Point is, one's opinion about the contract and the various stipulatios therein matter not. If a jury memeber in the case were to say "Well, I never...NO ONE should make that much money" the judge would throw them out...that is not a rationale for determing the merits of the case. 10% of the profits are 10% of the profits. Stan Lee would have SOME knowledge as to how this business works, dontcha think? Marvel isn't being greedy, they're just being flakes...trying to reneg on a contract they signed.

AnthonyL

11-14-2002, 04:30 PM

[quote]Dear god no! Not my spelling!!!

Spelling the word "weather" correctly when you meant to write "whether" is not a spelling error. You simply didn't know the difference between two words with completely different meanings. Now's the part where you respond "Get a life, Pointdexter" like you did with Blues Brother. Let the flaming begin.
<hr></blockquote>

You're an idiot, Blues Brother. A typo is a typo. And you're tounge licking of your own arse is getting to be to much. I thought you were hanging out with the intelligent people now? And furthermore, why even bring this up? I already aplogized, and you already posted once. What, slow news day? Got bored so decided to pick a fight? Go pound sand.

Anthony L

Nat Gertler

11-14-2002, 06:17 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Observer:
I'm confused. I just read a copy of what is purportedly Stan Lee's employment contract, and a clause reads that he will be paid 10% of the profits he earned during his life "from the profits of any live action or animation television or movie (including ancillary rights) productions utilizing Marvel characters."<hr></blockquote>You are confused. It does not say 10% of the profits he earned, it says 10% of the profits Marvel earned. To be precise: "you shall be paid participation equal to 10% of the profits derived during your life by Marvel (including subsidiaries and affiliates) from the profits of any live action or animation television or movie (including ancillary rights) productions utilizing Marvel characters." The key phrase being "profits derived [...] by Marvel".

Nat Gertler

11-14-2002, 06:25 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Scout99:
BTW, Stan doesn't deserve any money from the Blade films since he didn't create the character (Marv Wolfman and Gene Colan did). Neither from the MIB films (talk to Lowell Cunningham).<hr></blockquote>The contract he has with Marvel does not say that Stan only gets cuts of the profits from things that he created. Stan was acting as a Marvel representative to Hollywood at the time that the Blade deal was cut (although that would have been before the agreement at hand; I haven't seen any clear indication of what his previous agreement was.) Stan did much to build the fertile ground that helped bring Blade into publication.

Plenty of people profited off of Blade in various ways. It would have been nice if Marv and Gene had seen big money from the project -- but with all the shareholders in various companies who profited from Blade and from MiB, I don't see any reason to single out one man and say "he didn't deserve it."

Elayne Riggs

11-14-2002, 06:38 PM

[quote]Originally posted by ZOD:
What happened to "I'll still get my comics news here, but if I want to read or write intelligent commentary, I'm going to <a href="http://elayneriggs.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://elayneriggs.blogspot.com/</a> from now on. Peace. I'm out."? Change your name all you want, you're still the same dumb ****.<hr></blockquote>

Hey, what's wrong with my blog?

- Elayne (it's always all about me, after all)

QCCBob

11-14-2002, 08:36 PM

What's going to bankrupt Marvel is the LEGAL FEES from having to fight over legitimate contractual obligations that they seem to simply ignore. Just give Stan his money and pay restitution for not honoring the Terms of Sale contract, so Stan and the retailers get their fair share instead of the lawyers getting it all. It's just a shame that none of this should even be happening IF Marvel acted in a responsible and business-like manner. "With great greed comes great irresponsibility."

Oh, to those of you whining about what Stan deserves, he deserves what he has a contractual agreement to get AND he deserves whatever penalty is assessed on Marvel for failing in their obligation. It's really very simple. Marvel is bad, Marvel gets punished and, if it puts this ownership group out of business, too bad. Maybe the next batch will hire someone who can read and comprehend a simple contract or two.

pifpog

11-15-2002, 09:29 AM

[quote]Originally posted by Juliius:
[QB]Umm, all of you guys saying stuff like "NO ONE deserves that much money" and similar things, intimations that Stan Lee is greedy, etc...THINK!!

If Stan Lee doesn't get the money SOMEONE will. Do you honestly believe that the various execs and chair-people who run Marvel see no profits from these items (movies, cartoons, characters, etc.)? If they didn't they would be fools to continue on.

QB]<hr></blockquote>

Or maybe the money would go to the poor saps who bought Marvel stock? Wouldn't it be nice if they saw a profit just once?

pcnav

11-16-2002, 08:02 PM

Stan Lee never really created any characters.

Consider this: I say to myself "I want a box that can display pictures electronically". Then I go to someone and tell him what I want and he builds a television for me. Did I create the TV? No, because without expertise I would never have gotten to square one.

And anyone can come up with a concept, in fact the Mayan's and the Eqyptians both thought of pyramids. The thing is Stan Lee admitted he just came up with the concepts (on his Mutants, Monsters and Marvels DVD) and guys like Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko did the creating.

Stan Lee is a smiling shuckster out to make bucks at anyone's expense. Any book he and Kirby collaborated on had Jack Kirby's style written all over it. If Stan had great story telling ability his DC crap would have been more successful.

I don't support Stan Lee in any fashion.

Nat Gertler

11-16-2002, 11:04 PM

[quote]Originally posted by pcnav:
And anyone can come up with a concept<hr></blockquote>Yes, and anyone can make a drawing. That doesn't mean that anyone is likely to make a good drawing.
[quote]The thing is Stan Lee admitted he just came up with the concepts (on his Mutants, Monsters and Marvels DVD) and guys like Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko did the creating.<hr></blockquote>Care to provide an actual quote from Stan where he said that the other guys and not him did the creating? Or are you just inventing an admission for him?
[quote]If Stan had great story telling ability his DC crap would have been more successful.<hr></blockquote>Before you start waving that about, you may want to consider how successful the JISL books were compared to much of the later work of Jack and Steve.

pcnav

11-17-2002, 02:42 PM

To Nat Gertler:

[quote]Yes, and anyone can make a drawing. That doesn't mean that anyone is likely to make a good drawing.<hr></blockquote>

So your telling me that Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko had nothing to do with these characters being so popular? That an artist like those at Dell comics at the time could have done the job? You're mistaken if you think so.

[quote]Care to provide an actual quote from Stan where he said that the other guys and not him did the creating? Or are you just inventing an admission for him? <hr></blockquote>

Watch the DVD. If you miss it watch it again.

[quote]Before you start waving that about, you may want to consider how successful the JISL books were compared to much of the later work of Jack and Steve.<hr></blockquote>

How were they successful? I repeat, the Just Imagine books by Stan are crap. When Stan does pass on do you think he'll have the following Jack Kirby does (The Jack Kirby Collector)?

Stan wants what is his yet he did nothing to get Jack Kirby or Joe Simon what is their's (Captain America). Why do you think they have done interviews that denounce Stan. If he gets his bucks fine but I still think he doesn't deserve it and nothing will change my mind.

Jackie Chan's Pants

11-17-2002, 03:41 PM

[quote]Originally posted by pcnav:
Stan Lee never really created any characters.

Consider this: I say to myself "I want a box that can display pictures electronically". Then I go to someone and tell him what I want and he builds a television for me. Did I create the TV? No, because without expertise I would never have gotten to square one.

And anyone can come up with a concept, in fact the Mayan's and the Eqyptians both thought of pyramids. The thing is Stan Lee admitted he just came up with the concepts (on his Mutants, Monsters and Marvels DVD) and guys like Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko did the creating.

<hr></blockquote>

The difference here is that Stan not only came up with the concept, but also WROTE THE STORIES about the characters.

That is like saying that Garth Ennis did not create Preacher, because Steve Dillon did the art.

Think about that for a minute.

Nat Gertler

11-17-2002, 03:48 PM

[quote]Originally posted by pcnav:
So your telling me that Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko had nothing to do with these characters being so popular?<hr></blockquote>No, in no way, shape, or form am I telling you that. I do not feel that the popularity has to be ascribed solely to one of the collaborators.
[quote]How were they successful?<hr></blockquote>They sold a large (for today's market) dollar volume worth of comics.
[quote]Stan wants what is his yet he did nothing to get Jack Kirby or Joe Simon what is their's (Captain America).<hr></blockquote>The accuracy of presenting Captain America as being Simon And Kirby's in an ownership sense is questionable. Simon isn't even applying for Kirby to have part of it, he's claiming to have created the character himself, and the ownership situation gets tied up in details of dealings over 60 years old. It's hard to see what say Stan would have in this case, either, since he was not in power at Marvel at the time that the deal was made, nor is he in a position of real power now.

But hey, if you want to find reasons to slam one of the most influential comics creators in the history of the form, then you can also accuse him of not having solved the Linberg kidnapping.

TTROY

11-17-2002, 05:18 PM

THIS LAWSUIT ISN'T ABOUT WHO CREATED WHAT!
READ THE DAMN ARTICLE.
again it is about breach of contract on Marvel's part...bringing other creators or deciding who created what part of what characters is irrelevant.
Marvel enterinto an agreement with him and they failed to follow it through in a timely manner.
Marvel did not make this agreement with Ditko
They made it with Stan. Based on the properties that he had a hand in creating.
Marvel wrote up a contract and failed yet again to follow through.
Creator ownership had nothing do do with this...unless Marvel can prove Stan lee had no part whatsoever in the creation of Spider-man and that is highly unlikely.

pcnav

11-19-2002, 02:51 PM

To TTROY
[quote]THIS LAWSUIT ISN'T ABOUT WHO CREATED WHAT!
READ THE DAMN ARTICLE.
<hr></blockquote>
This is a discussion forum. Discussions branch sometimes. TAKE A CHCHILL PPILL TTROY.

brick66

11-19-2002, 02:54 PM

TTroy, these people have to know that this isn't about who created what. They just like to argue over the merits of Stan Lee as creator and writer.

The early days of Marvel, the stories were collaborative effort between young men trying to make a living working for a for comic book company. This was their jobs. This was 40 years or more ago. They weren't the celebrities that writers and artis are now. There was no wide distribution of product. No big media coverage of the comic book industry. They didn't expect the characters to become folk lore.

Stan Lee went into management and protected his ass. Kirby, Ditko and Simon remained creators who struck out on their own to make more money. And all did it later in life. At 70 -80 - 90 years old they deserve to grab all the money they can.

Matt Hawes

11-28-2002, 11:48 PM

It's about contractual agreements, not creator's rights.

Period.

<a href="http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/comicsunlimited@aol.com/" target="_blank">LOOKIE: COMICS and TOYS and MORE, Oh MY!</a>