🚀 go-pugleaf

>   DC finally bowed under to pressure years ago, and started
> paying some (rather token, compared to the revenues generated) royalties
> to Siegel and Schuster, creators of Superman.

I just want to point out one thing that isn't quite clear from this article:
DC was not in danger of losing the rights to Superman, they had already won
all the legal battles. They gave Siegel and Schuster pensions (not royalties)
because of the incredible amount of bad publicity they were getting over the
matter. The bad press also resulted in the firing of Carmine Infantino as
DC publisher.

>   I'm assuming that Kirby
> was not working under a "work for hire" contract while at Marvel; in
> small companies (as Timely was), they may not have thought of it.

It is my understanding that "work for hire" did not exist back then. I believe
that the revision of the copyright laws a few years back established the
concept of "work for hire". This should probably be cross-posted to net.legal.

			Scott McEwan
			{ihnp4,pur-ee}!uiucdcs!mcewan

"Hideously disfigured by Indian curse? We can help! Call (511) 338-0959
 for an appointment."