Stan Lee sues Marvel

[Guest starvenger]

Newsarama has the details and links

 

I'm not exactly feeling all that bad for Stan. I mean, it sounds strange that he's sueing Marvel, but he doesn't really WORK for Marvel anymore - he's work for hire, and bitching about not getting any of the pie from Spider-Man sounds just a wee bit bitter. I suppose he now knows how Jack Kirby et al might have felt.

 

Thoughts?

[Guest Sassquatch]

Bitter, bitter sweet karma.

 

Welcome to the land of the misused Stan. I think you *know* most of the guys there.

[Guest cynicalprofit]

As the creator of Spiderman and X-Men he should get paid since those are his characters. This just shows how truly bad Marvel the corporation is. As the shirt says, and Im proud to own, "MARVEL CAN SUCK MY COCK"

 

Yes I own that beauty.

 

This just reminds me of Bret/Vince and how Vince realized long term deals are NOT a good idea. Im sure if back in the day they gave him 10 million for everything, rights and all, he would have walked away quietly into the sun set and been the best guest on the comic scene every year.

[Guest starvenger]

As the creator of Spiderman and X-Men he should get paid since those are his characters. This just shows how truly bad Marvel the corporation is. As the shirt says, and Im proud to own, "MARVEL CAN SUCK MY COCK"

Actually, they're NOT his characters - Stan Lee, Steve Ditko and Jack Kirby created them, but Marvel owns all the rights. So really, they owe him squat.

 

That's obviously the simplified answer. I'm sure Sassquatch can explain the situation better (wrt to Stan and his co-creators), and after you read it, perhaps you'll be a bit less sympathetic towards Mr. Stanley Lieber...

[Guest gthureson]

Good response lower down from Doc_Weasel.

 

Read that, and Marvel may not actually appear to be in the wrong with regards to their agreement with Stan Lee. If those are actually the details of Stan's contract (he gets a percentage of profits not linked to licensing or merchandising), then its his own damn fault for signing it. The money is going to make off these movies is licencsing and merchandising.

 

Ah well.

 

I'll put my vote in for karma, as most of the attitude towards creators and what rights they have was formed while Stan was guiding the ship.

[Guest starvenger]

In case you were wondering what gthureson was talking aboat...

Not to be standing up for Marvel, but there are several things to note here. First, the agreement says Stan is entitled to 10% of the profits Marvel makes from the productions utilizing Marvel characters. This is not the same as 10% of the profits made from those productions. For example, any Marvel share of the profits from Spider-Man will be far, far, FAR less than the $800 million Spidey grossed. After all, it’s Sony Columbia, not Marvel, who is making money hand over fist on the movie.

Also, the agreement expressly states that Stan is not entitled to any percentage of the fees Marvel receives for licensing the characters or to any of the money made from merchandising. I did a quick search of articles written about the Sony Columbia – Marvel deal for Spider-Man and found several interesting items. A Variety article from 1999 discussing the deal contained this quote: “Marvel's Ellenbogen said the deal was significant to his company because ‘we own and control the merchandising rights -- the main source of income for Marvel will be merchandising.’”

 

Further, it is entirely possible that Marvel has no “profit interest” in the success of Spider-Man or other films. I can find no mention of Marvel sharing in any of the films profits in any of the articles I’ve just read. The closest thing I’ve found is a LA Times story which says Marvel’s licensing fee for Spider-Man depends on how much the movie grosses. The higher the gross, the more Marvel gets paid for licensing rights, with the amount topping out around $15 million. While this means the fee is tied to the profits, it would appear that the contract has been written so technically Marvel makes no profit from the movie. (This may have been done expressly to screw over Stan and others and may be a result of the Blade-Marv Wolfman situation.)

 

Finally, the agreement contains this sentence: “Marvel will compute, account and pay to you your participation due, if any, on account of said profits, for the annual period ending each March 31 during your life, on an annual basis within a reasonable time after the end of each such period.” Considering that Spider-Man was released in May 2002, the accounting period for paying Stan any share of profits from Spider-Man would end in March 2003. Marvel could easily make the argument that Stan hasn’t received anything from Spider-Man yet because the accounting period hasn’t closed yet.

 

I realize none of the Spider-Man specifics apply to any of the other Marvel movies, but I would be surprised if the details of those contracts are substantially different…

 

And apparently, this is the provision in question:

“f) In addition, you shall be paid participation equal to 10% of the profits derived during your life by Marvel (including subsidiaries and affiliates) from the profits of any live action or animation television or movie (including ancillary rights) productions utilizing Marvel characters. This participation is not to be derived from the fee charged by Marvel for the licensing of the product or of the characters for merchandise or otherwise. Marvel will compute, account and pay to you your participation due, if any, on account of said profits, for the annual period ending each March 31 during your life, on an annual basis within a reasonable time after the end of each such period.”

So here's another issue - Spider-Man came out around May, and if I read this right Marvel is due to pay him in March, so why is he jumping the gun 6 months early?

[Guest cynicalprofit]

Arent Kirby and Ditko dead, I know kirby is, but im not 100% sure about ditko.

[Guest Sassquatch]

Steve Ditko is still alive.

[Guest Karnage]

Steve Ditko is still alive.

Has he talked to Stan ever since he left Marvel?

[Guest Sassquatch]

No.

 

Stan wrote Steve a letter back in 2000 saying he wanted to make peace but Steve blew him off in his response to Stan's letter.

 

The response sent by Ditko was pretty nasty and just goes to show that old wounds never heal sometimes.

 

Steve and Stan are in the twilight of their lives and I honestly doubt that they will ever make peace and put everything behind them.

[Guest Blue Bacchus]

What did Ditko and Lee fall out about? If I may so inquire...

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

Here's why all the hate is there:

 

Back in '62 Stan Lee had an idea about a hero who could stick to walls. He asked Kirby for some pre-lim artwork and Kirby came to him with FLY-MAN. Fly-Man had a costume that was simalar to Spidey's, and had most of his powers. Stan rejected the artwork, he felt it was "too heroic" he wanted Spidey to be a teen. So he went to Ditko, and together, they polished off most of the character.

 

 

Trouble is, Stan takes ALL the credit for Spidey when he was just part of a team.

[Guest Sassquatch]

MrZsasz is...on track with how Spider-Man came about. But he totally missed the reason as to why Stan Lee and Steve Ditko broke up early into their Spider-Man run.

 

Co-collaborators Stan Lee (writer) and Jack Kirby (artist/plot director) conceived the Spider-Man in October of 1961. The Spider-Man prototype made its debut in the pages of Journey into Mystery #73. Lee did not like the spider-like character and turned to Steve Ditko for help. Both of the men wanted an insect base super hero to write about on a regular basis because they felt that kids would buy the book because they like bugs. Then Marvel Editor-In-Chief Mike Goodman told the duo to work on the character some more and get back to him when they worked out all of the kinks of the Spider-Man. It has been acknowledged by both Stan and Steve that Stan came up with the idea to make Spider-Man a teenager so young fans could relate to him along with the powers (sticky skin, enhanced agility, etc.) Steve came up with the layout for the costume along with the origin for Spider-Man which made him a tragedy based super hero that found out that he isn't invincible which is text book Ditko. Stan originally had wanted Spider-Man to be able to shoot webs out of his wrists but Ditko said that giving Spider-Man web shooters instead would be more appealing to science based kids who would buy the book in hopes of finding out how to make their own spider webbing.

 

Lee and Ditko came back to Goodman in June of '62 with the revamped Spider-Man and Goodman loved it. Spider-Man made his first revamped (and current appearance) in Amazing Fantasy #15 in August of 1962. The rest is history.

 

But the story above is not the reason why Stan Lee and Steve Ditko called it quits as a team.

 

I have said this many times in the past but if you actually go back and read some of the old threads then you might find out the answers to your questions which will help out everyone.

 

From a post of mine that is still showing up on the *first* page of the Comic Books folder and is only a couple threads down from this one.

 

Here is the real reason why Stan Lee and Steve Ditko broke up:

 

"Steve Ditko was another causality in Stan's goal to be the comic book God of the industry. Steve Ditko and Stan worked together on Amazing Spider-Man. They were considered one of the best teams in the industry at the time. But then Stan's ego reared its big head and all hell broke loose.

 

The big story in Spider-Man was the identity of the Green Goblin, who was a major player in Spider-Man. Steve wanted the identity of the Goblin to be that of a stranger. Someone that Peter Parker (Spider-Man) never met. It was a good idea. But Stan wanted the identity of the Goblin to be that of someone that Peter knew so that it would be "more shocking" which was bullshit. Steve wanted to point up the arbitration of life and to show criminals as seedy nonentities. But Stan wanted the credit of the Green Goblin to go to himself. It has been proven that Stan wanted to be the one who could take the credit for the identity of the Green Goblin, which was going to be a huge story. Stan pulled some strings in the front office and since he was the editor of the book, he told Steve that his idea "wouldn't get the attention of the fans like mine (Stan) would". The Marvel front office backed up Stan and Steve's idea was dead. He was sabotaged so badly, that he felt that he could not work at Marvel anymore and that he did not have the support of the front office like he needed. Steve packed up his things at midnight in early July of 1966 and quietly gave his resignation form to the front office telling them that he had quit. Stan got his way and the identity of the Green Goblin was Norman Osborn, who was the father of Peter Parker's good friend Harry Osborn. It was shocking, but who knows if Steve's idea would have been better. Nobody will ever know."

 

- Sass 9/2 on why Stan Lee and Steve Ditko broke up

 

Both Stan and Steve have publicly admitted that the above story told was why they broke off their relationship/friendship along with various comic book historians that have spoken with each man.

[Guest Some Guy]

SO these guys hate eachother because of a disagreement on whether a fictional character should or shouldn't know his fictional enemy. Sounds pretty lame to me.

[Guest starvenger]

SO these guys hate eachother because of a disagreement on whether a fictional character should or shouldn't know his fictional enemy. Sounds pretty lame to me.

Well, really, it's no lamer than anger over getting screwed out of a fake wrestling title...

[Guest Karnage]

Well, really, it's no lamer than anger over getting screwed out of a fake wrestling title...

[David Arquette In Ready To Rumble Mode] Wrestling's Not Fake![/David Arquette In Ready To Rumble Mode]

[Guest pinnacleofallthingsmanly]

From what I've read about Ditko, having a falling out over something that seems so trivial isn't too far out of character. He takes all of that stuff really, really seriously.

[Guest gthureson]

I'd take it seriously too if thats what I did for a living.

 

If I had to guess, I would say Ditko wasn't pissed off because of the Green Goblin thing per se, but more because Stan pulled a power play and screwed with the story he'd been trying to write for several months, and management helped him by cutting him off at the knees.

 

Comic writers take their shit as seriously as novel writers.

[Guest starvenger]

Comic writers take their shit as seriously as novel writers.

And rightly so. In most cases, it's their livelyhood, and supporting their family depends on them doing a good job (in order to continue getting writing gigs).

[Guest Sassquatch]

As I said earlier:

 

"He was sabotaged so badly, that he felt that he could not work at Marvel anymore and that he did not have the support of the front office like he needed."

 

 

Steve has an extremely low tolerance for bullshit political games and Stan's power play with the Goblin's identity drove Stan away from the company. It was a big "FUCK YOU Steve we have Stan's back and you are at the bottom of the totem pole."

 

Starvenger and gthureson pretty much covered the reasons as to why Steve got pissed and left Marvel. The low amount of pay that creators received back in the day was a joke and Steve was not going to lose his paycheck (regardless as to whether or not he came up with the Goblin story) to bullshit favoritism.