Kirby Estate, Going After Marvel and Disney for Copyright Ownership

Various Kirby co-creations with my caption

Kirby Estate Goes after Marvel

This news is a surprise! It appears that Jack Kirby, or rather his Heirs in the form of his Estate are going to sue both Marvel and now Disney. They are going for the Copyright ownership of the characters Kirby created or that he co-created.

They are using the same law firm that is representing the Superman case in court.

They are also going to go after the various movie studios that produced recent films.

I thought this change in copyright law only took effect if it could be proven a character was made before and that a publisher bought what was already created?

Such as the Siegel case. That is why in the Superman case, the Siegel family won something back.

BUT this is a case where a creator made Work For Hire material, on the job. Which is what appears to be the case with Kirby and his 60′s Marvel work.

This is a whole other matter to me. And not legally, anything like the Superman case that is going on.

Also I wonder to what extent this copyright law was changed? How many years are covered? Because if Kirby, or rather his family is able to gain come form of copyright and character ownership. What of Ditko, Romita Sr., and other creators from that era? Is it all going to be open game now? Can they sue for Copyright ownership?

I’m no lawyer, but just because Kirby helped make a lot of characters, this doesn’t mean his case is more valid then any other creator from that era. Can and will other Marvel creators ask and get copyright ownership back?

I also can’t help but think greed is a factor on why the Kirby Heirs are suing now. Why not earlier? I think they waited for others to start the hard work. And now they are riding the coattails.

The Superman case is going on and DC appears to be losing. Plus now, with the recent Marvel and billions deal. Is it any wonder that now this case is brought up?

While I think hiring the same lawyers as the Superman case is a good idea. I can also smell those lawyers just being sharks and wanting to get millions. Which is what they will get paid if they win their cases.

Overall Kirby at least did okay financially. And didn’t end up poor like other creators. As I read in a post, poor people don’t leave Estates.

I also wonder the fact that didn’t Kirby sign away his characters in later contracts? This is in regards to the 80′s art controversy and what What For Hire meant legally. If he signed away his rights in contract. How can his Estate get back what was already signed away?

And don’t forget most are co-creations. And not his characters outright. So exactly what percent of ownership is his family due?

For example Iron Man is mentioned. Yet Kirby had little to do with the character. He only designed the original armor, which is no longer used. He did not create the Tony Stark face, or the first issue. He did not create the origin. At least as far as I can tell in evidence.

So is Kirby really a co-creator of Iron Man? Sure he had a hand in it. But in my opinion, not much of a hand.

Wouldn’t Ditko deserve as much Iron Man co-creator status? After all, it was Ditko who made the classic slimmed down red and gold armor that has been the characters trademark.

And legally speaking I don’t think there is much documented evidence to back up any cases from back then. Without clear evidence for your case, how can you win? You can’t just say you co-created a character. Their should be clear evidence beyond reasonable doubt that you can backup your claim. I ask where is such legal evidence?

I’d be real interested if Ditko could get some Spider-Man and Dr. Strange ownership back? As a creator, I think he lost out far more then other creators. He co-created an icon that the world knows. And never was justly compensated for his work.

Other then questions, I’ll wait to see if this develops and more news on the subject.

I don’t think this case will win, if you had to prove you made the characters before the company hired you.

But if they win back some control of the character, then I think this could open a door to many other creators.

Legally this could also be one major problem for Marvel.

The ironic thing is a few weeks ago I posted an article wondering just this topic. What if other creators from Marvel could get their characters back?

Read the article by clicking the link below.

Work For Hire Copyright Ownership Laws Time For A Change