Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum << Prev Page of 9
Topic: JB: Curt Swan, Post Crisis (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Anthony Vincent Taliaferro
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: June 24 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 23
Posted: June 17 2006 at 12:48am | IP Logged | 1  

David Miller: Marvel had no right to the physical artwork. 

****

John Byrne: Yes, they did. And everyone understood this. Then
the law changed.

++++

Mark Evanier: I have a copy of a letter from a Marvel lawyer to Kirby's lawyer,
dated 1968. It's a response to a request from Jack -- and apparently
not the first one -- for the original art to be returned to him.”

****
Me: Gee, I bet Jack couldn’t understand why he couldn’t have his pages from this wonderful company – hell-- Steranko had a special relationship with Stan and got his back. Neal Adams always wanted his art back, and has said he couldn’t understand why either…..

 ++++
David Miller: It wasn't the fans who reneged on agreements with
Steve Ditko.

****

  John Byrne: Which "agreements" were these?

 ++++

Mark Evanier: From what I've been able to ascertain, Kirby was led to believe
that he would be compensated in two ways. One was in a share of all
merchandising income (Ditko was apparently promised this, as well)
modeled on the old Simon-Kirby deal for Captain America. The other
was a bit more complicated but it was basically that, if and when
Goodman sold the company, the underlying rights to the characters that
Kirby had created or co-created would not transfer unless Kirby was
involved in the deal and received a share. None of this happened.

 

****

John Byrne: Not if a court of law says it isn't. Jesus, get a fucking
clue!!!

++++
Me: Just because a court of law ‘says’ it, doesn’t mean it really wasn’t theft. A court of law said OJ didn’t kill his wife. Jesus, stop being so fucking naïve!!!

 

 ****
David Miller: My point was that DC and Marvel should be blamed
for casting off the creators. 

++++  

John Byrne: Neither company casts of creators whose work still
sells.

 
****
Paraphrased from Mark Evanier: In the late sixties Martin Goodman became aware of just how much work Kirby was doing for the company and realized that they were paying out rather a lot because of this. Goodman therefore tried  to cut Kirby's rate. It was never implemented because Jack threatened to quit if
they did.

Me: Jack eventually did quit shortly after because  the new contract he’d have to sign would make him say he didn’t really create characters, and other thoroughly demeaning things.

I think that’s pretty close to casting off a creator who sells.

Edited by Anthony Vincent Taliaferro on June 17 2006 at 12:57am
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 

Sorry, you can NOT post a reply.
This topic is closed.

<< Prev Page of 9
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login