CARMINE INFANTINO SUES DC FOR FLASH RIGHTS

**MattBrady** · 06-04-2004, 12:09 PM

According to a report in Newsday legendary DC Comics editor, creator, and former President Carmine Infantino has filed suit against DC Comics for the rights to the Flash.

The crux of Infantino’s claim rests upon allegations that in 1956, Infantino was commissioned by DC to revive the Flash character, which Infantino alleges he did, but owns the rights to the character.

The claim against DC was filed yesterday, and seeks monetary damages against DC, as well as a ruling that he owns the Flash, Batgirl, and a host of other characters which he created between 1943 and 1967.

Noting that the suit comes less than a month before the opening of Spider-Man 2, Infantino’s lawyer, Nicholas Perrella. told Newsday, "Obviously the characters have much more commercial value these days. Look at the Spider-Man movies."

DC offered no comment to Newsday, and, as a matter of course does not comment publically on pending or ongoing litigation.

Along with the Flash, Infantino also alleges that he revived Batman in ths ‘60s, by giving the character a new look, and creating Batgirl. According to Newsday, Perrella said Infantino gave DC Comics permission to use The Flash in comic books, not in other media.

This is the third known case of creators (or their survivors) have sought to regain the rights to properties created for DC: Joanne Siegel, widow of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel sought 50% of the rights to the character (reportedly, despite ongoing negotiations, no settlement has been reached); Green Lantern creator Marty Nodell sought the rights to that character (and reportedly reached a settlement with DC); and now Infantino.

holtom2000 · 06-04-2004, 12:14 PM

first post? I'm sure someone will beat me to the punch.
Holy crapolla. this is what they call a big ol can of worms. I really don't know what to say, but I hope Car has deep pockets, because I know DC's lawyers will.

Duke Harrington · 06-04-2004, 12:21 PM

Not gonna fly.

As I understand the copyright laws from the Previous cases (Simon vs Marvel over Cap, Seigel estate vs DC over Superman) one can only claim ownership (or more correctly, I think, reclaim the copyright) if one created the character independently and then sold the character to the publsiher.

In a strictly work for hire scenrio, as is the case with Infantino, the work remains the property of DC.

Carmine might get a little "shut-up-and-go-away" money, but has no hope of obtaining ownership of the characters, or to win the suit.

Strike · 06-04-2004, 12:21 PM

What does he hope to accomplish? The man's an idiot.

There's no way he can get the rights to characters he did not create. He may have redesigned them somewhat, but that's meaningless.

He has to know that he doesn't stand a chance. So why is he doing it?

Skyldt · 06-04-2004, 12:24 PM

holy. crap. probabaly not gonna win, but holy crap.

**MattBrady** · 06-04-2004, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Strike
What does he hope to accomplish? The man's an idiot.

Easy. Let's wait and see what the complaint alleges before passing judgement and castigating the man.

MattB

Raphe Cheli · 06-04-2004, 12:25 PM

While I fully supported Joe Simon's claim for Captain America, I'm hesitant (without knowing all the facts) to do the same with Carmine here. Not only was there already an extremely popular character called the Flash with the same powers, but Infantino was hired by National to create this update (as opposed to him creating it on his own and then bringing it to the company, as Simon did with Captain America or Dave Cockrum did with Nightcrawler). The same goes for Batgirl; her costume and history is so based on the Batman mythos, it's hard to separate the two and really have a defined creator.

algertman · 06-04-2004, 12:33 PM

dont think it will fly, like what has already been said, his Flash was just an update not an original person. No diffrent than if Bendis sued MARVEl claimng he created SpiderMan cause he writes Ult. Spidey

Jack Burton · 06-04-2004, 12:33 PM

An idiot? Geez that's harsh. The guy is a legendary creator who probably would like a little recognition and monetary compensation. Is that so wrong? Now granted I don't think he has a legal leg to stand on but I understand why he is doing this.

rockieman · 06-04-2004, 12:33 PM

As I wrote in the thread I started before Matt opened this thread, according to the article, Infantino gave DC permission to use The Flash in comics, but no other media. Why didn't he sue when the tv show aired in the early '90s, or when The Flash aired as part of The Superfriends in the early '70s. Of course that was also at the same time he was president of DC.

This whole thing is about money today, as cited by his lawyer when seeing the big Spider-Man $$.

kingofcities · 06-04-2004, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rockieman
As I wrote in the thread I started before Matt opened this thread, according to the article, Infantino gave DC permission to use The Flash in comics, but no other media. Why didn't he sue when the tv show aired in the early '90s, or when The Flash aired as part of The Superfriends in the early '70s. Of course that was also at the same time he was president of DC.

This whole thing is about money today, as cited by his lawyer when seeing the big Spider-Man $$.

I have to agree with you here. I think he does deserve more recognition than he gets, but the fact the he waited almost half a century to file the lawsuit is probably going to severely cripple his chances of having a legal decision on his behalf.

gOgIver · 06-04-2004, 12:41 PM

I am surprised Carmine Infantino is only on the Julie Schwartz DC Comics Presents: Batman #1 tribute book and not on the DC Comics Presents: The Flash #1 tribute book as well.

If he was only going to do one it should have been The Flash IMO.

MurrayC · 06-04-2004, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Strike
What does he hope to accomplish? The man's an idiot.

There's no way he can get the rights to characters he did not create. He may have redesigned them somewhat, but that's meaningless.

He has to know that he doesn't stand a chance. So why is he doing it?

First of all, he's not an idiot because he wouldn't have been able to [re]create some very memorable characters.

As to WHY he's doing it? Well, given his age and how much artwork he's doing these days, he's probably running out of money.

You're right, there is NO way he can obtain full copyright of the characters. But think of this lawsuit as if it were a union negotiating a collective agreement with a company... you ask for rediculous conditions, and then settle for what you actually need. In Carmine's case, he will probably get a nice settlement with future royalties for every type of media that involves the characters he had a hand in help create.

In my opinion, he had more leverage to do this when he was the publisher. Kinda makes you wonder how many creators he screwed over back-in-the-day?

I wish him the best, and I hope DC recognizes his contribution to Comics over the years.

Johnny Smith · 06-04-2004, 12:46 PM

Does this mean we'll get the real Flash (Barry Allen) back?

saiyanspider · 06-04-2004, 12:53 PM

If I pay you to creat a character to fight my character major plummer, and I pay you for the work how does that guy get to sue me for ownership. he did a job and was paid for it. that concept alone means I ask you to make me something you made it and was paid. If I made you a bed upon request and I sold to you why should I sue to reclaim the bed 10, 20, 30 years later?

All he did was redesign flash he didn't make the character, what a set man. then if he had his way there would have been no flash in the Justice league cartoon, and you can't have a JLA cartoon without him. arrghhh

cactusmaac · 06-04-2004, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Johnny Smith
Does this mean we'll get the real Flash (Barry Allen) back?

Darth Wahu · 06-04-2004, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Johnny Smith
Does this mean we'll get the real Flash (Barry Allen) back?

Barry's been dead for almost twenty years. What would be the point since Wally is a better Flash?

And if you wanted to argue about the real Flash? I would place my bets on Jay Garrick first.

Darth Wahu · 06-04-2004, 01:03 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Strike
[b]What does he hope to accomplish? The man's an idiot.

Nope just a putz who woke up and realized how much bank he pissed away by not demading a slice of the Flash pie.

kcekada · 06-04-2004, 01:08 PM

I don't know. It's hard to sympathize with the guy because for one, he was editr-in-chief at one time for DC. During the time he wouldn't give Dave Cockrum a piece of his own art and Dave left DC. So it seems he was a company man at one point, and now the shoe is on the other foot.

Also as mentioned, Carmine didn't create the Flash character. He was asked to revive the character by creating a new costume. Regarding Batgirl, at best, he's a collaborator and costume designer.

jedifish · 06-04-2004, 01:13 PM

Interesting how he filed this lawsuit after Julius Schwartz passed away.

brett · 06-04-2004, 01:21 PM

I thought Infantino revised, revived... whatever... The Flash.

He didn't create the Flash, the Flash was already created back in the 40's.

So, if Carmine Infantino owns The Flash, that would mean....

John Byrne owns Superman... and Supergirl (the green slime protoplasm one)!

But then, Peter David and Gary Frank own the Linda Danvers Supergirl; and the Kara Supergirl that he revived!

And Steven Seagal and Scott McDaniel own Cir El Supergirl

And Jeph Leob and Michael Turner own the new Supergirl

(If I were DC, I'd stop creating new Supergirls... they're spreading ownership quite thin...)

Gil Kane owns Green Lantern, not Martin Nodell.

But really, Ron Marz and Daryl Banks owns Green Lantern because Kyle is the one they're using now.

Tony Isabella and Richard Howell own Hawkman... but only until
Tim Truman's Hawkworld comes into play and then the Hawkgod one came and who created that memorable one, I forget but Geoff Johns should be the current landlord.

And let's not forget, Dan Jolley owns Firestorm!

Franklin Harris · 06-04-2004, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kcekada
Also as mentioned, Carmine didn't create the Flash character. He was asked to revive the character by creating a new costume. Regarding Batgirl, at best, he's a collaborator and costume designer.

My guess is that he is trying to take advantage of Gaiman vs. McFarlane.

To refresh everyone's memories:

In the appeals court decision in Gaiman vs. McFarlane, the court held that tweaking of existing characters could give the tweaker, so to speak, a copyright interest in the new character. The example in the Gaiman case is Medieval Spawn, which the court held Gaiman had an ownership interest in even though he didn't create the original character, namely, Spawn. According to the court's reasoning, Infantino could, in theory, claim an interest in the Silver Age Flash and Batgirl even though both are derivative of characters he did not have a hand in creating.

Brian Langlois · 06-04-2004, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Johnny Smith
Does this mean we'll get the real Flash (Barry Allen) back?

One could only hope. I always preferred Barry too.

Anyway, as for Mr. Infantino's suit, I don't think he'll get the rights to the cahracter back, nor do I necessarily think it's about the money. It might be about respect. The big companies have a habit of treating their talent poorly, especially ones who contributed so much so long ago. There are men who are the lynchpins in comic book history, who's work all other work is built upon. It is ridiculous that Seigle and Shuster had to sue just to get a Created By credit. This should be on all books in my opinion. Hopefully DC will decide to settle this and Mr. Infantino will get some deserved recognition (and a little monetary compensation wouldn't hurt). Good luck, Carmine.

Franklin Harris · 06-04-2004, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by brett
I thought Infantino revised, revived... whatever... The Flash.

He didn't create the Flash, the Flash was already created back in the 40's.

So, if Carmine Infantino owns The Flash, that would mean....

None of that. Those are all work-for-hire cases. Infantino claims his work for DC at the time was freelance and not covered by a work-for-hire agreement.

AlexLothos · 06-04-2004, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Raphe Cheli
The same goes for Batgirl; her costume and history is so based on the Batman mythos, it's hard to separate the two and really have a defined creator.

I thought something similar on the Medival Spawn/Spawn situation, but the court decided different.

Totally different case though...

Personally I think this was a bad idea. As already established, the best Infantino can hope for is for DC to give him hush money, but that'd look bad on DC (like Mike Jackson doing with those cases he gave hush money for). Even if they did give him a little hush cash, it wouldn't cover his legal fees for starting the case in the first place.