Posted in: Comics, Comics Publishers, Current News, Doctor Strange, Marvel Comics, Spider-Man, Stan Lee | Tagged: marc toberoff, steve ditko

Marvel & Steve Ditko Estate Settle Over Spider-Man & Doctor Strange

In the case of Marvel Characters, Inc. v. the estate of Steve Ditko, attourneys from both sides have written to the Judge about settling.

Back in 2021, comic book writer Larry Lieber and the estates of comic creators Steve Ditko, Larry Lieber, Gene Colan, Don Heck and Don Rico filed papers with Marvel Comics for the reversion of copyright rights to characters Spider-Man, Dr Strange, Iron Man, Captain America, Black Widow, Hulk, Thor, and others, owned by Marvel and Disney. In response, Marvel Comics filed their own lawsuits to dismiss these claims, as referring to work-for-hire practices which would be ineligible for copyright reversion.

In June this year, all but one of the matters was settled, Only the estate of Steve Ditko's claim over Spider-Man and Doctor Strange was, for unknown reasons, not settled. The case continued, with both sides issuing clarifying claims, changing dates for submissions, trials, and the like. Now it appears the case has been settled between Marvel and Steve Ditko's estate for both claim and counterclaim.

Dated the 6th of December, in the case of  Marvel Characters, Inc. v. Ditko, and titled "Anticipated Dismissal", the attourneys, Molly M. Lens representing Marvel and Marc Toberoff, representing Steve Ditko's estate run by Patrick S Ditko, have written to the presiding Judge Kaplan stating "We write on behalf of Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant Marvel Characters Inc., on the one hand, and Defendant and Counterclaimant Patrick S. Ditko, on the other (collectively, the "Parties"), to advise the Court that the Parties have amicably resolved their dispute and a stipulated dismissal with prejudice of the above-referenced matter is anticipated to be filed within the next 45 days."

Marc Toberoff told e earlier today, "The parties reached an amicable resolution of this very interesting case."

The original filing read thus: "It would be hard to find a better example of this than the amici who worked as freelancers from home, on their own steam, with no contract, no financial security, and no employment benefits, but without whom Marvel might not even be in business today. These prolific freelance writers and artists, who redefined the impecunious comic book business in the 1960's are literal poster-children for the termination right, exemplifying the very imbalance Congress sought to rectify. One need only look at the billion-dollar franchises these freelancers were instrumental in creating—Spider-Man, Thor, Iron Man, Dr. Strange, Falcon, Guardians of the Galaxy, Black Widow, Hawkeye, Blade—but have zero financial benefits from, to understand the importance of resolving the issues presented, justifying this Court's review. The pervasive use of the "instance and expense" test to eradicate the termination rights of such freelancers is not only unmoored from the 1909 Act, but it invites historical revisionism since the termination right does not vest until fifty-six years after publication. 17 U.S.C. § 304(c)(3). Corporate behemoths like Marvel, which were built on the success of such creations, but barely had one or two employees at the time it purchased such freelance material (for a pittance), now use their current stature to impose corporate authorship of "work for hire" under conditions that bore no resemblance to this, and a so-called "test" that enables them to do so. Inevitably, application of the malleable "instance and expense" test nearly always ends in a finding of "work for hire," with results that are often counterintuitive and unfair".

Enjoyed this? Please share on social media!

Stay up-to-date and support the site by following Bleeding Cool on Google News today!