Kirbys In Court....

I note that the family of the late Jack "The King" Kirby are ready to appeal again for some financial settlement and rights to his old Marvel work (are they suing DC over his work there?).

Now, like many of us who have worked in comics, Kirby was a freelancer.  He signed the cheque which was his payment and agreement that the work was "done for hire".  In the UK it was a bit murkier.  Like myself, most of the old pros I've spoken to say the same thing: they never signed a contract.  It was draw the pages, submit the pages and wait for payment. I am NOT going to go into the whole UK creators thing -I've done that in the past and its boring.

But if -if- the Kirby case succeeded.  If they won...well, the music industry, art world, TV and movies have survived and profited from "implied rights".  Success means those industries could be sued by creators and families thereof and lose billions.

Disney owns Marvel. Is Disney going to lose all the rights and money to "some old fart's family"? No. If it needed to it would drag this out in court for a couple decades. That's cheaper than accepting the potential losses.

Yes, it would be nice to have a Jack Kirby Museum but solely for Kirby work...what about the hundreds of other creators who contributed great work to comics -Maneely? Frazetta? Fradon?  Buscema? The list goes on and on. A Kirby Museum of Comic Art encompassing not just Kirby but other creators would be nice.

But if I were a betting man I have to say my money would be against the Kirby family, sad as that is.  Far more likely that the entertainment industry would financially support the Marvel case to prevent paying out.

Remember how DC Comics killed off characters to avoid potential lawsuits? "Death of The New Gods" (a Kirby creation), the Judo Master became female thus avoiding admitting it was THE original Judo Master.  Hey, The Question became female. And...you get where I'm going with this?

Ditko knew the score which is why he does his own comics (and he is not a starving, ripped off creator) and even when Stan Lee got him movie credits on Spider-Man it was Ditko who threw it all back. Did he get any money from the movies? Apparently there was something on offer but he refuses -hey, he has a Midtown office which aint cheap in New York.  You can read a NY Post article here:

http://nypost.com/2012/07/03/the-secret-hero-of-spider-man/

Let's remember that Ditko did a lot of comics work for DC and is anyone shouting "DC ripped off Ditko!"? No. "Marvel ripped off Ditko!" and "Marvel ripped off Kirby!" those are the battle cries from people who have a very one-sided slant on things.

Most retired pro creators -Kubert, Romita and others, all say the same thing "It was work for hire and with a wife, family and house you were glad to get that pay-cheque!"  No one seems to shout out that Lee (more than once) helped out the hard-up Kirby with extra work.

It would be nice...fair even...to see Kirby get a museum dedicated to all comic art.  It would be nice to see his wife get some money.  But I don't think it will happen -and do his off-spring deserve money for his work? It's a long arguement but the industry -most industries- will see it as "Pay one -you have to pay them all!" and they are not going to allow that.