Neal Adams On The Jack Kirby Case

[Rich Johnston]

Neal Adams helped Jack Kirby get credit for his Marvel work back in the seventies and eighties, and even got some of his art back from the publisher, but Jack never got a penny from the reprints and subsequent media exposure of his comic book work for Marvel during the sixties, where he co-created The X-Men, The Avengers, Fantastic Four, Hulk, Thor and so much more.

Last year, a New York court found against the estate of Jack Kirby over the ownership of his Marvel work. It's clearly been pressing on Neal Adams mind of late. He told Bleeding Cool;

I worry about Marvel Comics because of this judgment. I?m sure, based on his past record, that this lawyer is not the kind of guy who will toss in his cap, and call it a day. And Marvel, hooked up with Disney?? (Remember when Disney meant Walt?)

You?re probably like me and you thought/assumed Jack Kirby and family would end up doing at least as well as Stan Lee and family.

That would?ve been so good for our business. Nothing crazy. Just, well, fairness. It certainly wouldn?t break the company. Good vibes all around.

It would have made Jack and Roz very happy. I just don?t get it.

But now? Has this just awakened a sleeping tiger?

If folks asked me? (they?re not, are they?) I would council fairness and a quiet settlement? on human terms.

We don?t look good to the world with all this rancor. Comic books are still a mom and pop business. I HATE to have to explain all this to fans.

We?re all friends here, aren?t we?

You know, there's that Avengers movie coming with an awful lot of publicity featuring an awful lot of Kirby creations. I wonder what, if anything, Neal Adams has planned? To quote recent Marvel publicity, "It's Coming..."

[Knut Robert Knutsen]

I can understand the moral argument in favor of some sort of royalties for Kirby (or now his estate), but I feel that the Kirbys' lawyers overreached when they listed Spider-Man as a Kirby creation. To me, that stunt lost them a lot of precious credibility in the PR battle.

From the depositions that were made public last year, it looks like they might have had a case back when Kirby was alive and could testify as to his version of events. But now that the law can only consider Stan Lee's direct testimony about the unwritten business arrangements that were discussed solely between Lee (as Marvel's representative) and Kirby, that horse is beaten to death, and there's no meat left on the bone.

All anyone can do now is hope that it is possible to shame Marvel into paying up. But with Dinsey on board that seems unlikely. Disney has no shame.

Just out of curiosity: Would it be possible for the Kirby Estate to use the Kirby name as leverage by demanding that Marvel remove the Kirby name from all future print editions of Kirby's work, from all advertising and solicitation etc. until a royalty is paid? At least in European Copyright law, an artist's moral right (or that of his estate) to choose whether or not to be identified with his work when it is published exists separately from regular copyright. It could be argued that in view of Kirby's contentious relationship with Marvel in later years, he would not want them to profit further from his name and reputation.

I'm not sure if it is legally possible, or even desirable from the family's point of view, but it seems like leverage that would be very simple, very direct, possible to defend legally as well as very expensive for Marvel to comply with (it would put the kibosh on a lot of reprints that would have to be edited to eliminate Kirby's name. Kirby Essentials would probably no longer be affordable.)

[Dans07sti]

If jack was still alive I would deffinitly be pulling for him to win this legal battle, but since hes not they need to let it go.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

C'mon Rich - YOU know how to get items into the hand of mainstream press YOU should be kicking up a stink and shaming Marvel into crediting and paying Kirby for making their company.
Considerit penance for f'ing up the Princess Di arc in X-Statix!

[alekesam]

If the Kirby estate asked Marvel to remove Kirby's name from all of their books/reprints until royalties are paid, all that would do is play further into MArvel's long-running myth of Stan creating the Marvel U mostly by himself as they barely (and at times grudgingly) acknowledge him. As it is, it's sad that the newbies getting into comics these days know Stan but not Jack. Hell, Jim Lee gets more press than Jack.

[ColonelLee]

Neal is a little nebulous here .. he should have just said .. Jack Kirby was robbed! Jack is not the first to be robbed .. but maybe the largest .. along with Seigel and Schuster ..

Stan Lee got on the stand and stabbed Jack in the back ..

and yes .. there would have been no Spiderman without Jack Kirby .. admittedly Stan and Steve took Jack's basic idea and modified it .. but the idea began with Jack Kirby and Joe Simon ..

[QCCBob]

and yes .. there would have been no Spiderman without Jack Kirby .. admittedly Stan and Steve took Jack's basic idea and modified it .. but the idea began with Jack Kirby and Joe Simon ..

WHICH, if true, means Kirby stabbed his long time partner in the back by stealing HIS creation. Maybe none of them quite deserve sainthood, huh?

[die-yng]

Neal is a little nebulous here .. he should have just said .. Jack Kirby was robbed! Jack is not the first to be robbed .. but maybe the largest .. along with Seigel and Schuster ..

Stan Lee got on the stand and stabbed Jack in the back ..

and yes .. there would have been no Spiderman without Jack Kirby .. admittedly Stan and Steve took Jack's basic idea and modified it .. but the idea began with Jack Kirby and Joe Simon ..

This picture proves absolutely nothing.
This guy has more in common with Tarantula than Spider-Man and seems like another of the generic heroes in style of the Sandman (DC not Marvel) and the likes, certainly not the nerdy, poor highschool student who learned his most important lesson in his first appearance.
Even visually the most stricking parts of Spidey'sd appearance are missing (full face mask and the webbing!)

IN general and if Jack Kirby was alive I would want him to get the money and credit he deserves. As for the credit I think he actually gets enough credit in the comic fanbase. A lot of Stan Lee's publicity steams from his outgoing personality, apparances on tv and in films etc..

If Kirby where still alive when the movies based on his creations arrived and had been as willing as Stan to go public, then he would probably have become much more prominent to the general public as well.

And why bring Jim Lee into this.
Jim is an accomplished artist, successfull businessman and one of the guys leading DC, so give credit where it's due and let him enjoy whatever little attention he gets from the public.

[thekeith82]

Just out of curiosity: Would it be possible for the Kirby Estate to use the Kirby name as leverage by demanding that Marvel remove the Kirby name from all future print editions of Kirby's work, from all advertising and solicitation etc. until a royalty is paid? At least in European Copyright law, an artist's moral right (or that of his estate) to choose whether or not to be identified with his work when it is published exists separately from regular copyright. It could be argued that in view of Kirby's contentious relationship with Marvel in later years, he would not want them to profit further from his name and reputation.

I'm not sure if it is legally possible, or even desirable from the family's point of view, but it seems like leverage that would be very simple, very direct, possible to defend legally as well as very expensive for Marvel to comply with (it would put the kibosh on a lot of reprints that would have to be edited to eliminate Kirby's name. Kirby Essentials would probably no longer be affordable.)

It's an approach I agree with, and it seems to have had at least a degree of success for Alan Moore in the past. How much difference it could make here and now...I dunno. I can't see Disney bowing to that kind of pressure.

[Locusmortis]

IN general and if Jack Kirby was alive I would want him to get the money and credit he deserves. As for the credit I think he actually gets enough credit in the comic fanbase. A lot of Stan Lee's publicity steams from his outgoing personality, apparances on tv and in films etc..

If Kirby where still alive when the movies based on his creations arrived and had been as willing as Stan to go public, then he would probably have become much more prominent to the general public as well.

If you knew ANYTHING about Jack Kirby you should know that he did what he did to provide for his kids during his life and to leave them an inheritance after he passed. Neal is right in that fairness and morality would mean that the Kirby family should get a generous settlement. It would also serve to make Marvel and Disney look good instead of looking like a pack of corporate arseholes.