Logo pictures with my caption

I was looking at the first issue of Haunt #1, especially the inside credits page which shows the Haunt characters chest logo. It’s a swirling icon.

I was then thinking about the Sega Dreamcast, their old video game system.

The pictures above show a similar style in look don’t you think?

It’s probably just a coincidence, but it sure is funny that both look so similar.

Mayhem Image from Comic #1 with my caption

I still had doubts about the actual content that he was promoting, because I’m a cynical bitch after twenty years in comics

Brian Hibbs post

The above is a quote from from a Brian Hibbs article where he discusses a Neil Gaiman signing. As well as Tyrese Gibson’s “Mayhem” comic book, and twitter postings.

And I took the quote from the article above because he said the words himself. I find him to be a cynical bitch about comic books.

He starts off by basically reading into Tyrese Gibson’s mind and assumes him comic book is like the usual celebrity comic book and will have no lasting value. And that Tyrese has no long term commitment to the comic book.

He calls the art, just from preview samples a mediocre book. And that it looks like a 1990’s typical Image superhero book.

Hibbs then assumes he won’t sell any copies, so he ordered only three. He also posted on Tyrese Gibson’s twitter posts.

And one day before the Neil Gaiman signing he gets a phone call from Tyrese Gibson, who learned about him from his twitter posts. With Tyrese even offering to help his store sell issues.

Later on Hibbs complains because he is basically setting up his Neil Gaiman event, now he has to deal with Tyrese Gibson’s Mayhem fans because they are calling and want to buy the issue.

Basically Hibbs starts by complaining that Mayhem won’t sell and then when he gets fans who want the book, he is annoyed they are bothering him because he has to coordinate the Neil Gaiman event. Tyrese can help, but it has to be according to Hibbs schedule.

Hibbs sure comes off as I mentioned, and quoted from him above as that of a cynical bitch.

And I must admit and give respect to Tyrese Gibson who called him, and made twitter posts that got fans to call Hibbs store.

A celebrity making a comic book is one thing, but to promote the book to the point of looking up someone’s phone number and actually calling a retailer to discuss the comic book and whatever problems he is having. I think that is pretty much unheard of! Tyrese went above and beyond there, and is showing real passion for the comic book field and his comic book. It’s great to have a celebrity making a comic book he really cares about.

Despite his celebrity status, Tyrese is still down-to-earth and not ego tripping, like most who get celebrity status. Good going Tyrese!

Tyrese Gibson’s Twitter web page link

Over at this site I’ve been reading about Erik Larsen complaining and
basically trying to say Marvel swiped his Obama idea.

Comic Book Resources

Reading both sides, and while Erik raises some good points, I think
Marvel is in the right.

First off I think Erik has a personal issue with Marvel, and therefore
has a skewered viewpoint. So right off the bat he is not looking at
the situation with a fair view.

As a Publisher of Image Comics, he also has an agenda. Maybe his complaining is in part publicity, as well as trying to stir the pot just for the sake of it.

His complaint of Spidey using a fist bump Spidey editor Stephen Wacker called it on the spot and said they took it, from where Erik took it. It’s what Obama really does.

Erik complaining of Obama on the Spidey cover, because he got Dragon on his cover.

Well as Steve said no Duh, it’s only natural to put the guy on the cover to sell more issues. Does not mean the idea was taken.

When all is said though I think Erik is just annoyed at all the hype Spider-Man got with Obama, whereas his creation, the Dragon got just about no media hype at all.

But it’s only fair, the mainstream only knows a few superheroes. And does not care about the rest.

See my earlier post about disagreeing about using politics in superhero comics.

But with that said, and talking about this issue between Erik and complaining about Marvel. I really think he has no case. Maybe he feels he thought of the idea first. But even if that was the case, it does not mean that independently someone else could not think of the same idea.

I was thinking about creative rights and I wonder, and question Neil Gaiman’s rights in regard to Medieval Spawn and Angela.

Characters he created, or co-created for the Spawn comic book by Todd McFarlane.

I have followed this court case, though admittedly, I don’t know, or have read all the details.

But the basic concept is this: Neil Gaiman wanted the creative rights to the character of Miracle Man, who Todd McFarlane thinks he owns, because he bought the publisher of the Miracle Man property.

And Neil Gaiman offered a fair deal of exchanging his creative rights to Medieval Spawn and Angela, for the rights McFarlane claimed to have over Miracle Man.

It’s also an offer, had I been there I’d have taken. It was more then fair. And besides, McFarlane had no creative hand in the creation of Miracle Man.

Whereas, I’m not sure if Gaiman supplied the visual design detail on Medieval Spawn and Angela? Though, in this case, Medieval Spawn owes his look, on Spawn. Cause it was the basis used. And therefore McFarlane had a creative hand in this visual design by default.

While Angela appears to have that Mcfarlane design work going on, and at the very least she is wearing Spawn earrings. A creative symbol not of Gaiman.

But being stubborn, Todd challenged it in court and Neil Gaiman, last I heard won, and owns full creative rights to both Medieval Spawn and Angela.

If this is the case, I wonder if that means Gaiman can publish and profit a hundred percent off of Medieval Spawn and Angela?

And if he doesn’t have the right to publish them. Then it throw into question, what having full creative rights is?

Yet, a bigger question to me is: If Neil Gaiman does indeed have Full Creative Rights to both Medieval Spawn and Angela, that this is not right.

If anything, Gaiman should have co-creative rights with Mcfarlane. But not full rights to the characters. And I question: How could he?

Medieval Spawn is a Derivative Work, that is based on the Spawn concept, which was wholly created by Todd McFarlane. Even the visual look in style, is owed to Spawn, a Mcfarlane creation.

And Angela, while a new character, she owes her basis and origin to the Spawn mythos. Cause she was created to work in that world. Basically she is a Spawn slayer.

Seeing as how both are tied to the Spawn mythos. How can both characters be said to be owned wholly by Neil Gaiman?

This to me calls into question, and opens the door to Derivative Works.

If this case is to stand.

And yes, I know this won’t happen because of lawyers, and well, it just wouldn’t happen, I know that.

But, let’s say Derivative Works do count and a creator can claim a hundred percent rights to such work.

What’s to prevent others from doing it? And why therefore legally can’t others make such derivative characters?

For example you can have a character called Ninja Batman, and say it’s Batman in a different era.

Or the Hulk, but make him a new color and say he’s a version form a different timeline.

Basically, the idea of a creator owning full rights to a derivative work, such as in this Spawn case, does not seem right or just.

If you make a character, and it’s not derivative, then sure, you should have full rights to your character. But if your character, is based off the origin and history of another characters creator, I don’t think you should be allowed to have full rights to your character.

But what’s the financial aspect a creator should pay for a derivative work? I don’t know. I’d say anywhere from ten to say fifteen percent. Those are my thoughts. And also the original creator must give approval before such a derived work could be published. That’s my view on the situation, and what would be fair. What do you think?

A case like this, if it stands can really impact creative character rights and who owns what.

For me, I think at most Gaiman should have some rights to Medieval Spawn and Angela. But NO WAY should he have Full Creative rights to these characters. As for what percent he owns, or McFarlane owns, I can’t say.

And I bet McFarlane might have thought when this case ended, he should’ve taken the deal he was offered earlier and just given up Miracle Man, and got the offer to get Full Rights from Gaiman on Medieval Spawn and Angela. It’s what I would have done.