12345

Marvel's in for a Hulk of a Lawsuit - Barron's

Comment by Richard Land, Spokesman, Marvel
google news commentMarvel Response to Barron’s Article - 1 hour ago

There are many unsubstantiated and false claims in the Barron’s article. It is unfair to Marvel and its shareholders to dismiss Marvel’s position as simply attacking the messenger. Peter Paul has been convicted of three felonies and is awaiting sentencing for his latest crime, manipulating the stock of Stan Lee Media. His history speaks for itself. Marvel’s position with respect to Mr. Paul’s claims is not based on his lack of credibility. It is based on facts in the public record.

There are three main falsehoods underlying Peter Paul and Stan Lee Media, Inc.’s claims against Marvel.

First is the claim that Marvel is not the sole owner of every character created by Stan Lee during Mr. Lee’s lengthy tenure as a Marvel employee. Mr. Lee signed written employment agreements with Marvel in 1976 and 1980 in which Mr. Lee acknowledged and confirmed that all the work he did for Marvel from the beginning of his employment (in 1940) was as an employee. As is customary in contracts reflecting works made for hire, there was also a “belt and suspenders” assignment to Marvel of all rights in all characters he had previously created or would create for Marvel in the future.

The copyright law treats work done by an employee within the scope of his employment as a “work made for hire” which means the employer is automatically the author and owner for copyright law purposes. Therefore, Mr. Lee never owned any of the characters he created for Marvel. Since he never owned them, he could never have transferred them to anybody. Mr. Lee himself has always acknowledged that the Marvel characters belong and always belonged to Marvel.

Second, in order for Mr. Paul’s claims to have any traction, a court would have to accept that when Marvel rejected Mr. Lee’s contract in the bankruptcy proceeding, that rejection somehow resulted in a return to Mr. Lee of rights in Marvel’s characters. Not only did Mr. Lee never have those rights, but the rejection of Mr. Lee’s contract did not and could not have had that effect. Neither Mr. Paul nor SLMI has ever pointed to any legal support for their theory because they simply made it up.

Third, Mr. Paul has deliberately mischaracterized what happened in the 2002 Stan Lee/Marvel lawsuit. Since the majority of the litigation papers are public record, there is no reason for anyone to be confused. That lawsuit was over how to interpret a profit participation paragraph in Mr. Lee’s 1998 contract. It had nothing whatsoever to do with ownership of any characters. Mr. Lee never claimed in that lawsuit or anyplace else to own any part of any character he created for Marvel. In 2005, the profit participation lawsuit was settled. While the terms are confidential, Mr. Lee did not “give back” or transfer to Marvel any interest in any characters in the settlement.

The truth is a lot duller than the spin Mr. Paul is trying to put on the facts. Stan Lee never owned any of the characters he created and never claimed to own them. His contract with Stan Lee Media was and is clear on its face that Stan Lee was giving to his new company all the rights in characters that he planned to create for it – not any Marvel characters. Stan Lee Media was in business from approximately 1998-2001 when it went bankrupt. It made numerous filings with the SEC and issued a tremendous volume of promotional material. Once it filed for bankruptcy, its assets were subject to intense scrutiny. Through all of that time, it never once claimed that it owned any interest in any Marvel character.

Marvel's in for a Hulk of a Lawsuit - Barron's

Official Press Release

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Marvel Entertainment, Inc. (NYSE: MVL), reported that a claim was filed today in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York by Stan Lee Media, Inc. The claim against Marvel Entertainment alleges that nine years ago Stan Lee transferred to Stan Lee Media ownership of a number of Marvel comic book characters he co-created. Marvel believes that the claim against it is without merit and that it will prevail in this dispute.

Stan Lee Media was recently in bankruptcy and is being sued by Stan Lee. In his suit, Mr. Lee is challenging the legitimacy of the management of Stan Lee Media. Mr. Lee is a long-time employee of Marvel and its predecessor companies and currently serves as Publisher Emeritus of Marvel Comics. Mr. Lee commented that, "I do not support this action and believe the suit to be baseless."



This came out over a year ago?? Did Barrons really just find out about this now? Are they being paid by the Shorts to bring this back up? Something seems a little off

Marvel's in for a Hulk of a Lawsuit - Barron's

You hereby warrant that you have not assigned, licensed, pledged or
otherwise hypothecated, nor attempted to do so any of the Property and
Rights to anyone other than Marvel, its affiliates, predecessors or
their designees and will not do so in the future.


wouldn't this now turn into Stan Lee's problem and not Marvels?