Legion World Forums LEGION WORLD Science Police Headquarters Who "owns" the posts here?

Not to stir up a hornet's nest, but I'm assuming LL & NC have ownership rights to anything posted here? Guess I'm thinking along the lines of someone (like DC Publishing, as opposed to another person writing a fan-fic) taking an idea expressed here and putting it in a commercialized story - would they have the right?

I was talking about the Yahoo attachment wipe-out fiasco with someone who said that Yahoo owns all that stuff anyways since it was posted on their boards. Don't know if that's right or wrong....I figured once you post it one the net, it's a free-for-all but have no idea what is the official/legal story. Any idea?

To allude to U.S. copyright law (which is now conforming far more to international agreements, but it may not match Canada's law):

You own what you post on the Internet, in the sense of holding copyright. You don't have to register it with any authority (in the U.S., the Library of Congress), although that helps establish authorship if a dispute arises, and is usually required to collect civil damages.

You can give up your copyright, either by "working for hire" or explicit contract (though even then, you retain some rights as to reclaiming it later), or by openly stating that you're placing your work "in the public domain."

Most commercial Websites, including for Yahoo! and Warner Bros., require that you grant them a nonexclusive, permanent license to use what you write. Not for creating other works, but to allow them to mirror, back up, archive, and otherwise move around that material on their systems. It's specified in the on-line agreement that you acknowledge when you obtain a user ID. You retain your copyright.

And finally, Gary and Scott don't even make such a license a condition to post here. They have copyright only to what they write, and to the unique arrangement and appearance of these boards.

<--- Space-Lawyer-represented

As to visual art was posted in a venue such as LegionPics: It falls under either copyright or trademark law. To use DC works as an example:

If someone posted a scan of a page from a published comic, that was a use of material where DC holds the copyright. It could be falling under the exemptions for "fair use," for purposes of commentary, discussion, or reporting. (Parody is another category, set by court precedents.)

Many pieces of comics promotion or publicity art are fully released by DC for use by others for nearly any purpose, though DC retains copyright.

If DC complained about such posting or use, under U.S. laws, Yahoo! would have had the right to require that whoever posted it explain how this was a non-infringing or "fair" use. Or Yahoo! may have been obliged to remove it outright from the site, thus leaving it for the poster and DC to wrangle about later.

For works based on DC-owned characters, such as convention sketches, fan art, or fan fiction, that involves use of DC trademarks. DC has many more legal rights that it can assert about such use.

In practice, though, it rarely does so in regard to sketches by the likes of a Steve Lightle, as it would be upsetting a customary permission that has allowed them to indirectly promote DC's properties. Nor does it normally go after non-commercial or non-profit fan art or fan fiction.

Some posted works, such as Lightle's drawings of his original characters, fall, of course, under such a creator's own copyright.

Thank you Greybird. That's some legal department you've got at the Consulate.

After reading some of Juan's character descriptions (like "Swarm"), it got me thinking about some of the unique character ideas posted here - and also about some of the interminable battles over ownership that we sometimes hear about between creators and the publishers.

Well, the consul's just a copyright maven, that's all {g}

The disputes about ownership come from wrangling in the development process. Except when it's something that's sent unsolicited to a publisher. By now, all such work is being refused, and returned unopened, as it wasn't back in the days of a teenaged Jim Shooter. (See the note at the bottom of every DC In Demand page, in the fine print.)

Disputes with creators are usually worked out. DC and the other publishers are terrified of being sued for ideas "stolen" from unsolicited submissions. That's why literary and artist agents are used as the gatekeepers. It's also why DC is strenuous about banning fan fiction from its own Website.

If you were seriously interested in furthering a character concept on a commercial basis, you would never post it as fan fiction.

Last year, a fan fic website called DC Anthology had the Spoiler dress in Robin's outfit, so she looked like Carrie from DKR. A few months later, the same idea appeared in the pages of a Bat-title. The person who came up with the idea could do nothing about it - he had already infringed DC's trade marks by writing the fan fic, so what could he do about asserting the Spoiler idea was fairly his?

For those interested in such things, I'm writing (along with Big Bad Voodoo Lou) an article for the trade journal Managing Intellectual Property on disputes over (mostly superhero) character concepts.

Computo, it might be useful to people if you would post a synopsis of your article when it's done - or the article, if that's permitted. I don't know that many of us would have access to that journal.

Such discussions may not be everyone's cup of tea, but if you're going to the trouble of creating something, even in fun .... well, forewarned is forearmed.

Yeah, sure. I'll scan in the finished product and post it as an attachment.

A (very haphazard) draft is located here. Comments on it are very welcome and will be acknowledged in the article.

Dave

Well, he would have to prove that the WWYJ writers had seen his fic in the first place, wouldn't he? Plus, given the lead time in these things, maybe they came up with it first.

Its not as if "put character X in character Y's outfit" is an exceptionally original concept, after all.

Proving that the relevant writer had seen the fan fic is easy enough. Most website can track back visitors to their IP addresses.

Otherwise, true. It was a remarkable conincidence, if that is so.

I just finished reading the draft and found it very informative and engrossing. There have been a lot of recent legal proceedings going on in comics that I was unaware of (not that I normally pay attention to such things).

A couple of comments/questions:

1. Joe Simon -- I was unaware that he could challenge Marvel's copyright ownership of Captain America many decades after the fact. I also thought that Marvel/Timely had always used "Work for Hire" contracts and that, even though Simon was a freelancer, his work for the company was still "Work for Hire." I'm unclear on the distinction between freelance and "WFH."

2. Miracleman -- Did DC ever try to sue the various creators/owners of this character, who was derivative of Captain Marvel, who was (they said) in infringement of Superman? If not, I wonder why.

I've always been puzzled by the Superman/Captain Marvel suit to begin with. While there are certain surface similarities between the characters (both have capes, both can fly, etc.), they are also very different. Superman cannot turn into a boy; Captain Marvel is not from an alien planet, etc. To say that Cap is a ripoff of Superman is, to me, the same as saying all super-heroes are a rip-off of Superman.

3. Fighting American -- I'm totally surprised that Liefeld could get away with his derivative work of Captain America, Agent: America, by "marrying" it to an existing character. It was an ingenious ploy on his part (or on the part of his lawyers, no doubt). If Fawcett Comics had thought of this, they could have bought the rights to the Lone Ranger, for example, had Captain Marvel wear a mask and adopt an Indian sidekick, and gotten away with it.

4. Todd McFarlane -- I don't wish to defend him, but, in some ways I do feel sorry for him. He probably thought the name "Tony Twist" sounded cool and adopted it for his villain without thinking about how it might affect the hockey player. How many of us who aspire to doing comics for a living would have done the same thing? Inspiration has to come from somewhere and "Tony Twist" is wonderful name. (Though I can understand Mr. Twist's point of view, as well.)

Word to the wise: If you're going to publish a nationally distributed comic book, consult a copyright lawyer first.

Thanks for sharing this article with us, Dave. I'm looking forward to reading the final draft.