MARVEL COMICS DEMANDS $17,000 from BROKE CREATOR of GHOST RIDER! The Shame Of Marvel...Part II
This stipulation has been agreed upon and so ordered by the court, with the final judgement reflecting all that contained within. This now means that Gary Friedrich has the right to appeal, and appeal he shall, but it also means that he now owes Marvel Comics, a multi-million dollar making machine, backed by the multi-billion dollar Disney company, $17,000 and cannot ever sell anything related to Ghost Rider, nor can he even say that he created Ghost Rider for any form of gain or advertising. Well done Marvel!! I do wonder though, how does the likes of Joe Quesada, who has also made millions from Marvel in recent times, take the court's judgement? As Friedrich himself has stated, he is unemployed, has no real assets and is, for all intents and purposes, destitute. $17,000 might be chump change for some, but for someone in Friedrich's situation it's a lot of cash.
Marvel should be ashamed. Those in management there are probably congratulating themselves, having paid their legal team hundreds of thousands of dollars to pursue this claim, and are more than likely overjoyed that they not only won, but also eked out the last cash from Friedrich's pockets. And for all of those who are intending to go and see the Ghost Rider movie - remember the fate of the man who made it possible, all those years ago. I doubt he can afford a ticket, and Marvel won't be inviting him to the premier any time soon. I think, instead of going to see the movie, I'll see if anyone is starting a fund to raise the $17,000 on Gary's behalf and will donate to that instead. And if you have Quesada's ear, let him know what you think of this, and don't accept any weak excuses in return.
Here's the stipulation, because people are asking for it:
Here's the final judgement, clearly outlining the $17,000 that is now owed, to Marvel Comics, by the creator of Ghost Rider.
UPDATE:
I recived this email just this morning, taking offence at the posting of the legal documents. At the moment I'm working through it all as the Chilling Effects databse is down, as usual, so I can't see who ordered the takedown. Here's the notice.
If anyone is able to get into the database and can email me the details of the takedown, then please do. Beats me.
ANOTHER UPDATE:
Apparently someone called Lugi Novi took offence at the image of Gary himself. I guess even Gary Friedrich doesn't own his own photos these days. Oh well... all sorted.
Next time, try and email me directly before bringing in the heavy lads.
---------
Comments
This proves corporations are not only not people, they're also inhuman.
We all know you have the power to do this. But how about demonstrating a little responsibility in how you wield it?
I personally think that the new Ghost Rider movie should be boycotted to show Marvel that they are wrong for treating the creator of Ghost Rider like the dirt on the bottom of their shoes...makes me not want to buy any more books by Marvel - PEROID!!!
I wonder if the HERO Initiative might be able to help him out?
We just created a page on FB to show support for Gary: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Support-Gary-Friedrich/369685343043738
"Spirit of Vengeance" indeed.
Rip Off
Attached to the Judgement was a notice of appeal, and one of the reasons why the suit has been settled up so rapidly was to enable Gary to file an appeal straight away. Hell, I'd be tempted to pay the costs to lodge the appeal myself, just out of general principal.
"all intents and purposes",
not
"all intensive purposes".
See also: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/for_all_intents_and_purposes
Gary should not have to pay squat and Marvel should just leave the man alone....they can rest on their laurels that loopholes and legalese has made it possible for them to cheap out on a GREAT WRITER AND GREAT CREATOR OF ONE OF THE MOST ICONIC characters ever.
Sigh... Why does corporate greed have to kill my last link to childhood...
And they wonder why readership is at an historic all-time low.
Its scandals like this that puts another nail in the coffin.
Just like they treated Jack Kirby back in the '80s - even refusing to return his artwork to him...
Just like how they sat back and let Dave Cockrum - the creator of theit top cash-cow the Uncanny X-Men - die a slow painful death without lifting a finger to help him.
Why in the world would they seek destroy the life of the creator of one of their top money-makers?
No wonder so many industry legends frown down upon them.
So much for going to see Ghost Rider in the theater... I'll get a bootleg off the street.
I could go on and on and on......... about the lawyerin' done to keep money and rights from people who worked hard at perfecting their trades out of love. "Work for hire?" What about fair credit and a few bucks thrown in gratitude to artists and writers for an unexpected motion picture boomtown industry? And years later the geniuses who did the hard part saw nothing but a pauper's wage, a pat on the back and a merry "on your way", and people who weren't even born when the work was done, or did nothing remotely creative that couldn't be done from a cellphone on a golf course, pat each other on their backs because they are skilled at pushing paper, and rake in millions.
Maybe I'm missing this, but I don't see that in the documents. He explicitly can sell Marvel-produced Ghost Rider items with his signature, he just can't manufacture his own items to sell. I don't see anything about him not being able to claim to be the creator of the character, so long as he doesn't use the trademark. That might mean he has to be extra careful in advertising (if he offers to sell a Ghost Rider comic signed by the creator of Ghost Rider, can he show the cover of that comic which has the trademark?), but I think he can still claim to have created the character.
If he offers to sell a signed comic, then Marvel can ask for a portion of that money, no matter how he advertises. He can sign anything, say what he wants, but he cannot make money doing it.
But Marvel can make money from Ghost Rider, and does.
Oh Kopper already said that...but really! I'd donate!
And then this: https://www.change.org/petitions/marvel-stop-cheating-artists-out-of-their-money
I, for one, wasn't planning on seeing the damn movie anyway, but I'd certainly send the money to Gary to help him out. I've also already signed the change.org campaign.
Second, this isn't quite deplorable yet. If this is just the law firm being white shoe firm assholes, that's just S.O.P. That said, it would be nice if Marvel is aware of this, they put a stop to it.
Third, at this stage it isn't quite so much deplorable as bizarre. Where's the $17,000 come from? Marvel's damages, from what I understand -- from Friedrich's selling the "prints", not litigation costs -- would be approximately zero.
No what burns *my* ass and no one else's, apparently, is the judge's opinion granting summary judgment to Marvel was, well, a piece of garbage legally. Here entire reasoning was that whatever Friedrich had or didn't have was signed away by the 1978 agreement. Which is my problem. The way it works, to overly simplify, is this: Marvel gives something in exchange, "consideration". In this case, it was at the offer -- not even the promise -- of future assignments. My question, which the judge, as I recollect, chose not to address, is this: Was such an offer sufficient consideration to make the agreement binding?
While this crap is kind of deplorable, everyone's over-reacting. The big thing will be whether Friedrich appeals. And gets better representation because I'm not too sure about the present legal team. (I don't know that they're bad, I'm sort of reverse-engineering with limited knowledge of What Went On.)
At the end of the day, I think Friedrich's claim is actually relatively good. (Far better than the Kirby's estate's.)
Of course, if you want to talk moral as opposed to legal, it's a whole different thing....
The actual ruling leaves a lot of wriggle room for an appeal, but the $17,000 demand is just vile.
I'm sorry, maybe I'm dense, but are you basing this on documents or statements in addition to those you've posted above? Because all I see is that he can't use the Ghost Rider trademark. Saying "I created Ghost Rider" does not use the trademark as I understand it, any more than me using the name in this comment uses the trademark. I suppose you could argue a convention advertising "Ghost Rider creator Gary Friedrich", or a sign on his table saying "Ghost Rider creator" would be using the trademark, but that's quite a stretch, and I don't think comic conventions usually have to get permission to use a character name in that capacity.
And I'm not sure how Marvel can ask for additional money if he sells a signed comic. The agreement allows him to sell his autograph affixed to a Marvel-produced Ghost Rider item. No mention of paying Marvel for that, and provided he legally obtained the item he's selling the first-sale doctrine means Marvel has no claim to that money.
To be clear, I think what Marvel is doing is lousy (and perfectly in keeping with their history), but unless there are other documents you're referring to I don't think your interpretation of how far-reaching their claims are is correct.
And Mickey Mouse say: Give me your money stupid consumers, one old indigent has no right to sell pictures of my characters registered, so the creators are living in poverty. I need many money to to continue prostituting teens with producers of programs in Disney Channel.
The case was ruled in Marvel’s favor in late December 2011, and upon appeal, the two sides settled in 2013.
What that means in actual folding money, we'll never know. RIP, Gary, and rest easy: the movies were terrible, and your best work in comics was SGT FURY in the first place.