Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum << Prev Page of 14 Next >>
Topic: Marvel sues Kirby heirs to keep copyrights (Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Pascal LISE
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 July 2006
Location: France
Posts: 1111
Posted: 12 January 2010 at 3:21pm | IP Logged | 1  

So what?

Nobody's perfect !
Back to Top profile | search
 
Paul Greer
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar

Joined: 18 August 2004
Posts: 14191
Posted: 12 January 2010 at 3:30pm | IP Logged | 2  

Nobody's perfect? What does that mean in context to this discussion?
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133257
Posted: 12 January 2010 at 3:31pm | IP Logged | 3  

So what?

Nobody's perfect !

••

Do you have to be "perfect" to behave honorably? Steve Ditko doesn't seem to think so.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Jason Czeskleba
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 April 2004
Posts: 4617
Posted: 12 January 2010 at 4:01pm | IP Logged | 4  

 John Byrne wrote:
Since I got paid more than twice as much as Chris, that didn't seem such a big deal.


Do you know what the pay scales were like in the 60's at Marvel?  Did artists make more than twice as much as Stan or Roy back then?  Or is that something that had evolved over time in the 70's?

As a tangent, I'm curious:  in the 70's did you generally get paid a higher rate for books on which you were co-plotter as opposed to art robot? 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Jason Czeskleba
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 April 2004
Posts: 4617
Posted: 12 January 2010 at 4:11pm | IP Logged | 5  

 Matthew McCallum wrote:
Kirby's "walkaway" also had some other elements in the mix.


Lots of elements.  I think people make too much of the credits issue, and not enough about money.  Over the 60's Kirby was given vague promises from Goodman about profit-sharing related to merchandising and other media use of his characters.  When the sale to Perfect Film and Chemical came through, Goodman refused to honor those promises.  To make matters worse, Kirby's contract expired in 1968 and he was working without a contract.  Goodman told him he needed to talk to the new owners, and Perfect Film wouldn't make time to meet with him and discuss his contract.  He asked Stan for help but Stan said there was nothing he could do; he was too busy negotiating his own situation.  Kirby was told by a representative of Perfect Film that they felt Stan was the genius behind the company and they could get anyone to draw Stan's stories.  Finally, the lawyers from Perfect Film sent a contract to his home which had worse terms than his old expired one.  When he called to discuss this, he was told "take it or leave it" and they reiterated Stan was the only important part of the company in their eyes.  That's when Kirby left Marvel.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matthew McCallum
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 03 July 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 2711
Posted: 12 January 2010 at 4:22pm | IP Logged | 6  

As a sidebar -- but a significant sidebar -- anyone seeking a sliver of insight into Steve Ditko's mindset should read (or watch) The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand.

A complex man cannot be reduced to a mere book or motion picture character, but when I read Ditko's essays he seems very simpatico to Howard Roark, the central character of the novel (played by Gary Cooper in the film) who serves as the voice of Rand's Objectivist philosophy. Roark is an architect who cares not for riches or fame but rather for the freedom to create and the opportunity to realize his vision unimpeded by the looters and critics that plague society:

"Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people! Your own work, not any possible object of your charity. I'll be glad if men who need it find a better method of living in the house I built, but that's not the motive of my work, nor my reason, nor my reward! My reward, my purpose, my life, is the work itself - my work done my way! Nothing else matters to me!"

"No creator was prompted by a desire to please his brothers. His brothers hated the gift he offered. His truth was his only motive. His work was his only goal. His work, not those who used it, his creation, not the benefits others derived from it. The creation which gave form to his truth. He held his truth above all things, and against all men. He went ahead whether others agreed with him or not. With his integrity as his only banner. He served nothing, and no one. He lived for himself. And only by living for himself was he able to achieve the things which are the glory of mankind. Such is the nature of achievement."

"The creator stands on his own judgment. The parasite follows the opinions of others. The creator thinks, the parasite copies. The creator produces, the parasite loots. The creator's concern is the conquest of nature - the parasite's concern is the conquest of men. The creator requires independence, he neither serves nor rules. He deals with men by free exchange and voluntary choice. The parasite seeks power, he wants to bind all men together in common action and common slavery. He claims that man is only a tool for the use of others. That he must think as they think, act as they act, and live in selfless, joyless servitude to any need but his own. Look at history. Everything thing we have, every great achievement has come from the independent work of some independent mind. Every horror and destruction came from attempts to force men into a herd of brainless, soulless robots. Without personal rights, without personal ambition, without will, hope, or dignity. It is an ancient conflict. It has another name: the individual against the collective."


Edited by Matthew McCallum on 12 January 2010 at 5:17pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Pascal LISE
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 July 2006
Location: France
Posts: 1111
Posted: 12 January 2010 at 5:07pm | IP Logged | 7  

"Nobody's perfect? What does that mean in context to this discussion?"

It means, you just can't rule out Kirby's attempt to get a fair share from his work and creations just because he didn't always "behave" honorably in his past especially in light of the common business practices at that time.

If Kirby wasn't honorable in his business practices, what could be said about Marvel?
When the rules of the game are bad, you try and change the rules.

And do we need to remember that the sheer number of Kirby's successful creations set him well above most artists?
He deserved more than what he got and certainly more than what Marvel gave him.



Edited by Pascal LISE on 12 January 2010 at 5:19pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Paul Greer
Byrne Robotics Security
Avatar

Joined: 18 August 2004
Posts: 14191
Posted: 12 January 2010 at 5:15pm | IP Logged | 8  

Well in response to your "Nobody's perfect", Marvel wasn't perfect either. Why don't they get a free pass?
BTW, what rules are we trying to change here?
Back to Top profile | search
 
Joel Tesch
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 May 2006
Posts: 2830
Posted: 12 January 2010 at 5:25pm | IP Logged | 9  

It means, you just can't rule out Kirby's attempt to get a fair share from his work and creations just because he didn't always "behave" honorably in his past especially in light of the common business practices at that time.

Yeah, Pascal, but that's not the point being made. It's not about whether Kirby behaved "honorably" in this practice (or whether Marvel did for that matter). It's did Kirby UNDERSTAND that he was working as work for hire for Marvel. If his heirs can prove he reasonably did NOT know or understand this (or reasonably thought he was under some other kind of agreement that gave him some degree of ownership), then the heirs have a case. However, it's extremely hard to prove that Kirby did not know or understand this practice/policy, when HE HIMSELF instituted the exact same work for hire policy when he ran his own shop.



Edited by Joel Tesch on 12 January 2010 at 5:26pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Pascal LISE
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 July 2006
Location: France
Posts: 1111
Posted: 12 January 2010 at 5:56pm | IP Logged | 10  

Joel, I was developing for Paul what I replied to Mr Byrne.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Joel Tesch
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 May 2006
Posts: 2830
Posted: 12 January 2010 at 6:14pm | IP Logged | 11  

Yes, I know.

Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Grumpy Old Guy

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133257
Posted: 12 January 2010 at 8:42pm | IP Logged | 12  

If Kirby wasn't honorable in his business practices, what could be said about Marvel?When the rules of the game are bad, you try and change the rules.

••

Which Kirby didn't, when he had the chance.

And what can be said about Marvel? They offered the same shitty deal everybody offered, and they made no secret of it.

Back to Top profile | search
 

<< Prev Page of 14 Next >>
  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