Some Kirby/Marvel links

twitter Some Kirby/Marvel links0facebook Some Kirby/Marvel links0google Some Kirby/Marvel links0pinterest Some Kirby/Marvel links0tumblr Some Kirby/Marvel linksreddit Some Kirby/Marvel links0stumbleupon Some Kirby/Marvel links0email Some Kirby/Marvel links

201108030224 Some Kirby/Marvel links

The must-read from yesterday is Michael Dean’s look at the actual court documents:

Although today publishers are required to show contractual proof of work-for-hire arrangements, there was no such requirement during this period of Kirby’s freelance work for Marvel. In the absence of a contract, Judge McMahon relied on the instance-and-expense test. Under this test, a work-for-hire relationship is said to exist if a creator produces work at the behest of a publisher/employer and is compensated by the publisher/employer for the work. Toberoff argued that Kirby had generated ideas and concepts beyond what he had been specifically assigned to create, but McMahon concluded Marvel’s editorial supervision of Kirby’s work and its page-rate payments to him were sufficient for the relationship to pass the instance-and-expense test.


Much more that everyone should read before making uninformed statements.

ALSO, Spanish cartoonist Pepo Perez has his own comments on creator ownership battles, here in the Google translation. That’s makes for some awkwardness, but also some great stuff.

I keep reading some arguments on the case heirs v. Disney Kirby, American and Spanish forums, and I get the smoke ears.

Comments

  1. The judge can cite any damned examples he wants. But what *people* are interested in is FAIRNESS and JUSTICE.

  2. Well, that’s certainly a constructive start to this comments thread. Thanks, Mike!

  3. Barry Buchanan says:

    ahem “Judge Colleen McMahon”

Speak Your Mind

*