Marvel Universe (Thar be spoilers ahead.)

[eldaec]

One could argue that Disney also went for a younger audience when they canceled Clone Wars when they acquired the Star Wars franchise and replaced it with Rebels.

Both shows were described by the teams involved as 'six to adult'. Whether they delivered that is up for debate ofc.

[Khaldun]

Here's a bit of intellectual property stuff that puzzles me: James Gunn said that the character Kang the Conqueror is owned by Fox. I can't think of a more Avengers-defined villain, so that seems weird. I'm not that sad about it, because I think Kang has only been in one or two genuinely good stories in his career and a lot of bad ones, and time-travel villains are usually dumb anyway, but it really makes me wonder how on Earth whatever contract Fox has entitles them to some of the things it entitles them to.

[HaemishM]

Kang? That is wholly bizarre.

[taleril]

Apparently Kang started out with a different name and in Fantastic Four.  I really hope a lawyer somewhere had to consult a comic book nerd to make that argument during negotiations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kang_the_Conqueror

First appearance
as Rama-Tut:
Fantastic Four #19 (Oct. 1963)
as Kang:
Avengers #8 (Sep. 1964)

[HaemishM]

That is actually true. Kang has been Rama-Tut, Immortus and Kang (as well as Young Kang or Kid Kang or whatever from the Young Avengers). Still seems one very strange acquisition, as Rama-Tut is barely even a minor villain in FF lore, while Kang is one of the top 4 Avengers' villains.

[jgsugden]

Regarding the ridiculousness of the Fox/Marvel Feud and whether Marvel is attempting to minimize the value of FF and X-men to Fox:

http://www.blastr.com/2015-6-2/image-day-marvel-drops-x-men-and-fantastic-four-its-2015-lineup-poster

I think it is more about establishing major storylines that they can capitalize upon in film without worrying about the FF and X-men being involved, but I think there is a bit of twisted knife in the actions as well...  I'm giving it a year before Fox sues Marvel for attempting to sabotage the value of their properties...

[Lakov_Sanite]

Fox won't sue because they know it would just be a waste of money and you know, fighting disney over a copyright case is a kind of stupid that doesn't exist in nature.

This image is however, hilarious.

[Khaldun]

Fox doesn't have any standing to sue: they own the film rights and that's it. Marvel doesn't have to publish anything featuring those characters if they don't want to.

[sickrubik]

Spidey with the jazz hands.

[HaemishM]

http://www.blastr.com/2015-6-2/image-day-marvel-drops-x-men-and-fantastic-four-its-2015-lineup-poster

I'm giving it a year before Fox sues Marvel for attempting to sabotage the value of their properties...

Both that article's insinuation and your conjecture are dumb, and everyone involved in uttering those things should feel bad about having done so.

Disney gives exactly NO FUCKS about who is featured in the Marvel Comics. ZERO FUCKS. When the comics manage to sell 100,000 copies, they are a successful comic. 100,000 fans of a movie? That is a John Carter level of fuckup for movies. The comics are a goddamn blip on the movies radar. If Disney/Marvel movie people gave any fucks about what the comics are doing, do you think they'd have allowed Marvel to age Captain America and replace him with the Falcon (who prior to his turn in the Winter Soldier, most idiots wrongly considered a joke)? Marvel Studios only real relationship to the comics is they reserve the right to cherry pick the fuck out of the comics for whatever stories or purposes they want. Marvel Comics might consciously be trying to showcase their MCU characters because THAT'S SMART MARKETING. But their promotional materials being used to marginalize characters that Marvel Studios don't own the rights to? That's not even remotely logical or plausible, because the fucking numbers don't back up the assertion that the effort would make a bit of fucking difference.

It could be because the Fantastic Four and X-Men titles have been pretty mediocre to terrible for a while now, and keep getting canceled/rebooted.

[jgsugden]

Man, you folks are weird.  You assume someone has to have a good reason or a leg to stand on to sue someone?  One year is my best bet.  But what are the chances I'd be right above Spider-man coming to the MCU, there being a Civil War movie, and something else equally as obvious?

Intentionally removing characters from existing artwork takes effort.  They don't just fall off the art.  Choosing to eliminate those same characters consistently from new artwork, from storylines, etc... also is done for a reason.  It isn't like FF suddenly started sucking over the last two years.  It has struggled for a long time.  Assuming that this has anything to do with the quality of the stories is ridiculous.  This is an effort, whether effective or not, to undercut Fox.

...and your numbers do not factor in people that download torrents, buy the compendiums or subscribe to services (Marvel Unlimited) to get access to the stories.  It isn't like there are only 100,000 people out there that read the stories.  Not all of them pay (or pay 'full price' for the comic stories, but the comics are serving as co-funded marketing for the toys, movies, etc... 

[Ironwood]

I loved that cover.  And the T Shirt.  I had that issue.

Sadness.

[Tannhauser]

Man, you folks are weird.  You assume someone has to have a good reason or a leg to stand on to sue someone?  One year is my best bet.  But what are the chances I'd be right above Spider-man coming to the MCU, there being a Civil War movie, and something else equally as obvious?

Intentionally removing characters from existing artwork takes effort.  They don't just fall off the art.  Choosing to eliminate those same characters consistently from new artwork, from storylines, etc... also is done for a reason.  It isn't like FF suddenly started sucking over the last two years.  It has struggled for a long time.  Assuming that this has anything to do with the quality of the stories is ridiculous.  This is an effort, whether effective or not, to undercut Fox.

...and your numbers do not factor in people that download torrents, buy the compendiums or subscribe to services (Marvel Unlimited) to get access to the stories.  It isn't like there are only 100,000 people out there that read the stories.  Not all of them pay (or pay 'full price' for the comic stories, but the comics are serving as co-funded marketing for the toys, movies, etc... 

I sort of agree with you they are undercutting, but like Haem said, comics are a pimple on the MCU's ass. Why would they make a great comic story featuring the FF and the Avengers?  Then the MCU goes "Wow!  Love that story, let's put it in the MCU, oh wait we can't because Fox owns FF."  The comics are focusing on the Marvel-owned cinematic properties, looking to be the crucible where new MCU movies are forged.

[jgsugden]

That is obviously and clearly part of what is going on - but the intentional deletion of FF and X-men from iconic images is not a separate thing from the elimination of these characters from ongoing stories.   What some people seem to fail to realize is that the relative unimportance of the comics is a reason why they are sabotaging the Fox properties in the comics.  Because the MCU is worth so much more than the comics, they're sacrificing aspects of comics to further the value of the film MCU... even if the sacrifice is a major loss to the comics and only a small potential game in the MCU realm, that small percentage change in the MCU is worth more than the comics huge percentage impact.

[Fordel]

The people in charge of Marvel/Disney and the people in charge of Fox fucking LOATHE each other. I wouldn't be surprised if this all wall just motivated by SPITE. 

[Khaldun]

Sure, but they can't do a damn thing about it. The contract is pretty clear on this, I gather, and I'm sure Disney can pay for enough moneyhat lawyers to keep it that way. They can spite the living fuck out of Fox.

[Evildrider]

Sure, but they can't do a damn thing about it. The contract is pretty clear on this, I gather, and I'm sure Disney can pay for enough moneyhat lawyers to keep it that way. They can spite the living fuck out of Fox.

That's pretty much it.  Fox can't do anything to Disney except keep pumping out movies to keep the license.  Marvel could stop producing any X-Men and FF stuff totally and not have a thing to worry about.  Hell there was a rumor a few years ago that Marvel said the X-Men writers couldn't introduce new characters/villains.

[HaemishM]

...and your numbers do not factor in people that download torrents, buy the compendiums or subscribe to services (Marvel Unlimited) to get access to the stories.  It isn't like there are only 100,000 people out there that read the stories.  Not all of them pay (or pay 'full price' for the comic stories, but the comics are serving as co-funded marketing for the toys, movies, etc... 

You could quintuple the sales numbers and no one at Marvel Studios would give two shits. Also, they can track Unlimited subscriptions and comics read as well (or if they can't, their app guys should be fucking fired). What the comics do means fuckall to the movie people.

Fuck. All.

[Merusk]

The Marvel movie people, sure. I see no reason Marvel corp would want to continue providing story beats to competitors for free though.  Hell if they full on ended Spidey, FF4 and X-Men comics they're within their rights to do so. any argument about hurting the other studio brand wouldn't hold water because there's no contract to provide work, just ownership of IP. 

Try and force Marvel to publish and you've just killed writers selling movie rights ever again. You'd be arguing that Rowling has to continue writing Potter to provide Universal more stories because not doing so damages their movie brand. That's going nowhere and probably wouldn't even get heard on appeal.

[jgsugden]

It is so cute that you talk about law suts like they'Re surgical instruments, carefully crafted for a deserved legal goal... so gosh, darn cute.  In this context they'Re clubs used to apply pressure.

... and once again, the clear intentional effort to remove FF and X-men from existing materails is undeniable evidence that there is an effort to undercut the properties in the comics and related environments.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Sony would be wasting their money just to file a lawsuit against disney.  There would be ZERO effect on marvel/disney, no pressure, no loss of time, not even a slight headache.  Sure disney would have to hire their own lawyers to get it easily thrown out of court but that amount of money would be laughably small for them.

That marvel is retconning FF/xmen out is yes, undeniable but that sony could ever think to do anything about it besides whine? That idea is comical.

[Lantyssa]

Do you mean Fox?  Sony finally came to the table and made a deal.

Fox is crazy not to.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Oh yeah my bad, Fox. 

[Ironwood]

Do you mean Fox?  Sony finally came to the table and made a deal.

Fox is crazy not to.

You never know.  They could be crazy...like...a... fox....


I'll get my coat.

[sickrubik]

Fox is in a much better state than Sony is.

[Khaldun]

It is so cute that you talk about law suts like they'Re surgical instruments, carefully crafted for a deserved legal goal... so gosh, darn cute.  In this context they'Re clubs used to apply pressure.

... and once again, the clear intentional effort to remove FF and X-men from existing materails is undeniable evidence that there is an effort to undercut the properties in the comics and related environments.

So? Law suits are used "like clubs" when one party has much less money than the other, or when one party stands a serious chance of not just losing but establishing a legal precedent that will hurt badly in the future. Disney/Marvel can outspend Fox legally and there's nothing scary in any litigation. So please, stop acting like you know something everybody else doesn't. "Undercutting" is something that Disney/Marvel can go ahead and do to their heart's content without any worries, legally or otherwise. They've got the whip hand here.  The first time FF or X-Men films flop badly is the first time Fox will be under the gun to decide whether to take the money Disney is likely willing to put on the table and run. The only other meaningful option Fox has is to keep making movies that make enough revenue back that they're worth it to keep making.

[HaemishM]

The Marvel comics people do have a vested interest in putting the properties owned by their parent company forward - but I'm not really seeing that they have any benefit from removing the properties that Disney doesn't own the rights to. It doesn't benefit them.

Of course, it could also be that one of the most recognizable of those properties (Wolverine) is dead in the comics (or has he returned yet) and none of the other X-Men really has anywhere near that sort of recognizability. Also, the X-Men books aren't sales drivers like they were in the '90's and the FF books? Total shit sales. The first X-Men title on the April 2015 sales list that's a regular title is at #35 on the chart with sales around 50k. Fantastic Four is #62 with 39k sales.

There's no reason to highlight either of those properties over movie properties based on sales or popularity. And who knows what they have planned for post-Secret Wars books. Maybe both books get shitcanned for terrible sales.

[Merusk]

It is so cute that you talk about law suts like they'Re surgical instruments, carefully crafted for a deserved legal goal... so gosh, darn cute.  In this context they'Re clubs used to apply pressure.

... and once again, the clear intentional effort to remove FF and X-men from existing materails is undeniable evidence that there is an effort to undercut the properties in the comics and related environments.

No, what's adorable is your belief that Fox could do anything but annoy Disney legal team #15/240 for a few years as they respond. It wouldn't even give the execs of Marvel OR Disney a fitful dream some evening.

Fox has no play and no standing and Disney/ Marvel know it. That's why they're sun-setting the characters in the first place. Sure, Fox can throw money at a suit and expend some of Disney/ Marvel's capital but that's it.

Based on the sales numbers H's quoted, the time and expense to publish comic books that go unsold is going to be greater than the time for the legal team to say, "Fuck off" to any imagined lawsuit.

[jgsugden]

Sony Fox would be wasting their money just to file a lawsuit against disney.  There would be ZERO effect on marvel/disney, no pressure, no loss of time, not even a slight headache.  Sure disney would have to hire their own lawyers to get it easily thrown out of court but that amount of money would be laughably small for them.

So I take it you have absolutely no legal experience what-so-ever.  And you've never read a newspaper or looked at the business section of a real news site.

Suits like this drag on for quite some time.  

*It would need to be disclosed on the financial statements for Disney, Marvel, and whatever else was dragged into the suit*.  That is a big pain ... and it is only the tip of the iceberg.  While you have these suits in place, you can ask for nuisance injunctions - and often get them ... and even when you do not get the full order, there is often temporary injunctive relief that can cause delays at critical times.  Even if you don't ask for injunctive relief, the threat that you might - even if there is no merit for the claim - might be enough to cause your opponent to take costly precautions.  

It would not be dismissed casually ... there would be attempts to get it dismissed, but they would likely fail.  To kick a suit to the curb, you need to demonstrate there is no chance that the opposition can win.  You need to basically be able to say, "If you assume everything they claim is true, there is no valid legal claim here."  That may not sound like a big deal to you, but it is huge.  You're not realizing how much information they'll be throwing out there and how many claims they'd be making.  If there is pretty much any chance that someone could give the claim any credit, the case would proceed.  If a case as big as this one would be were to be dismissed, it would involve gross incompetence by Fox's attorneys, even if there is nothing but smoke and mirrors behind their claims - and there would be a shade more than smoke and mirrors here.  Would they win the case if it went to trial sometime in the 2020s?  Their chances would be a lot better than you think, but still - likely not.  However, the trial would be incredibly unlikely.  Marvel would either settle or Fox would eventually drop the case if Marvel were able to endure the harassment long enough to mitigate the leverage.  And let's not even discuss the inevitable countersuit by Marvel alleging Fox's misuse of the IP and other crap... (which would have even less merit, most likely, but would also not be dismissed).

To be more specific: Marvel gets value when Fox makes these films, Marvel has a contract with Fox related to the IP, and Marvel is taking steps that undeniably are aimed at reducing the value of the contracted property.  There are lots of potential claims to be pursued with that simplified fact pattern that would clearly NOT be dismissed unless Fox was hiring an attorney that demanded $45 an hour plus free chips AND soda.  The people behind suits like this one are very smart, are heartless, and are very persuasive.  They get paid big bucks to abuse the legal system and make it dance for their clients.  They do it well.  

Is it possible that Marvel might get this before the perfect judge, might catch Fox's attorneys with their pants down and might be able to get it dismissed? No, not really.  It is not a realistic possibility.

There is a reason why people get paid to go away rather than have cases with no merit dismissed.  The costs would be massive to both sides of the suit, and those costs (both direct financial costs and indirect costs, such as the impact of having to disclose such a law suit on the financials) would be the leverage Fox would use to force something to happen.  Poison pill type tactics.  What they'd want to see happen is anybody's guess right now... they might decide heroes are headed for a decline and try to force Marvel to buy the rights back (unlikely, but possible)... they might try to force Marvel into a similar agreement to Sony's with better terms (getting more likely)...

Look at the technology industries.  Look at the financial industries.  Look at the oil, tobacco, video games, pharmaceuticals, etc....  

All that being said: The most likely reason why Fox would not bring a law suit is that it is a negotiating tool that is costly and they'd only go there if Marvel doesn't play ball.  Marvel has an interest to play ball, but the steps they're taking clearly are not cooperative right now.  If the two sides make some progress towards a solution they both can live with, they won't escalate to the law suit ... so quickly.

I'm done on the topic.  Flame away.

[Lantyssa]

Of course, it could also be that one of the most recognizable of those properties (Wolverine) is dead in the comics (or has he returned yet) and none of the other X-Men really has anywhere near that sort of recognizability.

I think he's still dead, but I fully expect he'll return with the end of Secret Wars.

[Lakov_Sanite]

 

[jgsugden]

Of course, it could also be that one of the most recognizable of those properties (Wolverine) is dead in the comics (or has he returned yet) and none of the other X-Men really has anywhere near that sort of recognizability.

I think he's still dead, but I fully expect he'll return with the end of Secret Wars.

Likely, but there is talk it may be a different version of Wolverine than the one that died: Old Man Logan might be the Logan that emerges. 

[Lantyssa]

As opposed to Siege Perilous Logan, or Bone Claw Logan, or Patch Logan, or Samurai Logan, or Lost His Healing Factor Logan, or ...

It'll still be Wolverine, just with whatever the latest spin is.

[Velorath]

To be more specific: Marvel gets value when Fox makes these films, Marvel has a contract with Fox related to the IP, and Marvel is taking steps that undeniably are aimed at reducing the value of the contracted property.  

It's not undeniable. The simple response is: "We find it a more valuable use of our resources to create merchandise that promotes characters that appear (or could potentially appear in the future) in our movies, TV series, and animated series. We are not contractually obligated to do marketing for the characters Fox has licensed, and we feel that including those characters in our merchandising potentially creates brand confusion giving the impression for people unfamiliar with our comics that Fox's movies are linked to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. However we would also like to note that these characters still play prominent roles in our line of comics. Not only do Fantastic Four characters Reed Richards and Doctor Doom play pivotal roles in this Summer's big event Secret Wars, but we continue to publish a substantial amount of X-Men related comics every month. Our comics line is constantly evolving, and that often requires titles or characters being taken out of circulation until we can find the right pitch or creative team to reintroduce them, such as when the first volume of X-Men was canceled and later relaunched with the now-classic Giant Sized X-Men #1."

Anyway, Christopher Tolkien has publicly stated that he thinks Peter Jackson's movies are shit but you don't see WB trying to sue the Tolkien Estate for undermining their license.

[Lakov_Sanite]

Also the proof is literally in this thread that marvel is in fact retconning stuff belonging to fox OUT of merch and comics. Is it a good idea, a bad one? Are they gonna be sued? Those are actual questions but the fact remains that marvel IS doing this.