Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Marvel Misleads Investing Public in Official Response to Barron's Article

Marvel Misleads Investing Public in Official Response to Barron's Article

Ratings: (0)|Views: 39|Likes:
Published by stanleemedia4
Marvel, through its official spokesman, filed a response to William Alpert's feature story in Barrons, June 30, 2008, "The Rage offstage at Marvel"
The response, annotated with the true facts, was an effort to mislead shareholders and the public to believe Stan Lee never asserted any claims of ownership in his world famous characters copyrighted by Marvel and co-owned by Stan Lee
Marvel, through its official spokesman, filed a response to William Alpert's feature story in Barrons, June 30, 2008, "The Rage offstage at Marvel"
The response, annotated with the true facts, was an effort to mislead shareholders and the public to believe Stan Lee never asserted any claims of ownership in his world famous characters copyrighted by Marvel and co-owned by Stan Lee

More info:

Published by: stanleemedia4 on Jun 07, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/11/2014

pdf

text

original

The Rage Offstage at Marvel
Barron's - Jun 29, 2008
By BILL ALPERT Lawsuits raise questions about Marvel Entertainment's title to its billion-dollar character
franchises, which include The Incredible Hulk....
Comment by Richard Land, Spokesman, Marvel
Marvel Response to Barron\u2019s Article- Jul 1, 2008

There are many unsubstantiated and false claims in the Barron\u2019s article. It is unfair to Marvel and its
shareholders to dismiss Marvel\u2019s 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\u2019s position with respect to Mr. Paul\u2019s 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.\u2019s claims against Marvel.

First is the claim that Marvel is not the sole owner of every character created by Stan Lee during Mr. Lee\u2019s
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 \u201cbelt and suspenders\u201d assignment to Marvel of all rights in all characters he
had previously created or would create for Marvel in the future.

The fallacy of this argument is that all previous agreements to the November 17, 1998 agreement Stan
Lee entered into with Marvel AFTER it voided Stan's lifetime exclusive agreement and assignment
(which was the successor to ALL previous employment/rights assignments with Marvel) in August
1998 as Marvel emerged from bankruptcy, all previous agreements were voided as of August, 1998-
leaving a gap of assignments by Lee between Augsut and November 1998 when Lee coerced Marvel to
replace the contract they voided two minths earlier with an unprecedented contract that paid Lee
more than any other Marvel employee while requiring Lee to only spend 10% of his time working for
Marvel and allowing him to spend 90% of his time competing with Marvel using Marvel's characters!
Stan never confirmed anywhere in an assignment or contract with Marvel that hos works were work
for hire- instead he claimed ownership of his creations in his 2002 suit against Marvel for a profit
participation no other employee ever received!

The copyright law treats work done by an employee within the scope of his employment as a \u201cwork made
for hire\u201d 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.

This is another falsehood- merely review paragraphs 14, 15 and 39 of Stan Lee v Marvel Characters, 2002 Manhattan Federal Ct where Lee states \u201che expected to share in all profits derived by Marvel from his world famous characters which had been conditionally assigned by Lee to Marvel under the Nov 1998 agreement for that purpose\u201d

Second, in order for Mr. Paul\u2019s claims to have any traction, a court would have to accept that when Marvel
rejected Mr. Lee\u2019s contract in the bankruptcy proceeding, that rejection somehow resulted in a return to Mr.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->