Sorry, not sorry

Who created Caitlin Snow on #TheFlash? According to @DCComics, nobody

Who created Caitlin Snow, the alter ego of Firestorm super-villain Killer Frost, who appears regularly on The Flash?

According to DC Entertainment, nobody.

That’s right. Caitlin Snow, the brilliant scientist working for Harrison Wells, fiancée of Ronnie Raymond and friend of Barry Allen, aka The Flash, sprang fully formed into existence without a creator or creators.

But that’s okay, because, by the logic employed by DC Entertainment, nobody created Barry Allen either.

Let me explain. See if you can follow me here.

As I’ve described elsewhere (http://comicsequity.blogspot.com), many years ago DC Comics established the first program to provide comic book creators with a share in the revenues generated by their creations in other media. This concept became known as “creator equity participation” and it was a small but significant step toward compensating creators for their work beyond a simple page rate. For me, personally, it’s been moderately lucrative (thank you, Bruce Timm, for putting Killer Croc in the animated Batman) but in recent years it’s also become an increasingly frustrating and, lately, infuriating process.

The reason, I believe, is the shift of corporate culture at DC Comics that occurred around the time Paul Levitz left his position as publisher.

As a comic book creator himself, Paul displayed a protective empathy for creators. Once the creator equity concept became policy, Paul applied it liberally and proactively– often notifying writers and artists their creations were due to receive equity participation when creators would otherwise have no idea. For thirty plus years, under Paul, creators were valued and supported as equity partners. (We can argue about the level of support, whether the percentage creators received was commensurate with their contributions, but we can’t deny that the support was there, and it was consistent.)

All of that changed when Paul left, and DC Comics became, officially, DC Entertainment, a fully subsumed cog in the Warners Entertainment wheel.

I first learned how this change would effect DC’s approach to creators equity when I received a letter from DC Entertainment’s new president, Diane Nelson, informing me I would no longer receive equity payments for Power Girl because she was now considered a “derivative” character. To soften the blow and show “appreciation” for my “contribution” she enclosed a check for $1000.

Thank you, Diane.

The next thing I learned about DC Entertainment’s new approach to their comic creators equity program was just as distressing, given how many characters I created for DC over the decade-plus I wrote for the company: if I wanted to receive an equity participation contract for a character I created, I had to request one, in writing, for each character, before that character appeared in another media, because DC would refuse to make equity payments retroactively.

By a rough guesstimate, I probably created over five hundred characters for DC between 1969 and 1985. Most of them were minor one-shot creations, and some of them, like Felicity Smoak (now a regular on Arrow) were minor supporting characters who’ve taken on a new life in other media. Unless I’m willing to commit a large chunk of my life to tracking down each character and filing a separate equity request in anticipation that somehow, some day, one of these characters might end up on a TV show, I risk being cut off from any share in the fruits DC enjoys from the product of my labor. A share which DC acknowledges I’m due– but which DC refuses to assist me in receiving.

Thank you, DC.

But now we come to the catch-22 of DC’s new approach to creator equity agreements. Assuming I perform my due diligence (which should really be DC’s due diligence) and dig up references to characters I’ve created that might soon be appearing in other media (maybe as a chess piece, or a Heroclix figure, or a recurring character on The Flash), and assuming I file the necessary request form in a timely fashion– DC can still decide, unilaterally, that my creation is “derivative” and they don’t owe me a dime.

What, exactly, is DC’s definition of a “derivative” character?

It’s a character that DC decides was “derived” from some other previously existing character.

For example, Power Girl– “derived” from Superman, because, like Supergirl, she’s a relative of Superman. Which means I can’t claim to be her co-creator because Superman is a pre-existing character. Fair enough, I suppose. The logic here is that Superman is the original creation, so Power Girl is derived from that original creation, so in effect, Power Girl is an extension of Superman, which means, by this tortured logic, that Power Girl was more or less created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster.

Uh, no.

This was the tortured logic National Periodical Publications tried to use back in the 1940s when Siegel and Shuster sued National for the rights to Superboy. National (the company that preceded DC) argued that Superman was the original creation, which Siegel and Shuster sold to National, and that Superboy was just a “derivative” creation. A court-appointed legal referee found that Superboy was in fact a unique creation and that National was guilty of copyright infringement. Sadly for Siegel and Shuster (and for creators everywhere), legal expenses forced the creators to sell National the rights to Superboy in a consent decree that obscured this fundamental finding. But the finding is pretty clear:

Characters “derived” from other characters are legally unique, and DC’s claim that “derivation” deprives creators of any equity participation rights in those characters is nothing more than an immoral, unethical, deceitful and despicable money grab.

Yet, it gets worse.

Let’s say DC agrees you created a character, like, for example, Killer Frost. In your original creation, Killer Frost had a secret identity named Crystal Frost. Later, a “new” Killer Frost is created for the New 52, and this new Killer Frost has a secret identity named Caitlin Snow.

You’ll be pleased to hear (I hope) that DC agrees I and Al Milgrom are the co-creators of all manifestations of “Killer Frost.” We are also considered the co-creators of Crystal Frost. And, of course, by the twisted logic that credits Power Girl as a derivation of Superman, Al and I must also be the creators of Killer Frost’s New 52 secret identity, Caitlin Snow.

Right?

No. We’re not. And DC insists we are not. And I agree with DC.

Caitlin Snow was created by Sterling Gates and Derlis Santacruz.

Except, according to DC Entertainment, she wasn’t. Because she was “derived” from the original creation of Killer Frost.

Which means Al Milgrom and I created her.

Except, according to DC Entertainment, we didn’t.

Nobody created her.

Or, rather, nobody gets credit and creator equity participation for creating her.

And that, my friends, is truly obnoxious and despicable.

DC Entertainment has created a marvelous catch-22 that allows them to cheat creators by using both sides of an argument to serve DC’s interests.

According to DC, Sterling Gates and Derlis Santacruz didn’t create Caitlin Snow. Don Newton and I didn’t create Jason Todd. Ric Estrada and I didn’t create Power Girl. Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster didn’t create Superboy. Bob Kanigher and Carmine Infantino didn’t create Barry Allen.

These characters just appeared out of nowhere.

But the money for their exploitation goes directly into DC’s bank account.

Superheroes From Marvel and DC Comics Battle Villains From ‘Star Wars’ in an Epic Movie Trailer Mashup

A little too much " look at all the epic battle match ups I can make", but very well done, and Superman vs Darth Vader is a fascinating concept. Worth the price of admission to see Magneto go up against a Star Destroyer.

The Trouble With Wonder Woman

The sequel to Man of Steel is one of the most awaited films. There’s a lot of inquisitiveness regarding the plot. However, the producers are making sure the storyline stays behind curtains. In this technological era, it’s not hard for inside details to surface. Alleged spoilers include a retired forty-year-old Bruce (plausible), Batman is an international legend (no doubt), the film starts seven years after the events of The Dark Knight Rises (highly questionable), Batman is rebuilding his city alongside Nightwing, and Wayne says he’s financing Batman (this can’t be connected to Chris Nolan’s Batman ‘cause Wayne’s dead?). Probably a bunch’a BS, if you ask me. Still unsure how they’ll fit WW…

The Saturday Morning Post, by Ruiz Burgos.

Greg Rucka comments on Lois Lane, Superman, and their treatment

[click here for the original post]

After watching Scott Lobdell humiliate a female Lois Lane fan on his Facebook page yesterday and then reading this…it’s honestly hard not to cry.

Greg Rucka almost never fails to impress me with how completely, perfectly, he Gets It. How I wish this man was still working for DC Comics. (Not that I blame him one bit for not being interested.) And most especially, I wish he was still writing Superman and Lois Lane. Because I really think he understands not only these characters, but a general, troubling trend in comics we’re seeing all too often lately.

Well said, Mr. Rucka. Very well said, indeed.

10 Diversity Resolutions for Superhero Comics in 2014

By Andrew Wheeler

A new year. A new start. A new chance to make a change. Long-time readers of this site may know that we at ComicsAlliance are proud cheerleaders for a more representative industry. We like political correctness. We like feminism. We like diversity. We want the industry at large — and the superhero publishers in particular — to embrace these things.

To that end, we have a few suggestions for how superhero publishers might change in 2014. Some of you may look at this list and say it’s too ambitious, or that we’re asking for too much. We say this list is a good start. These are our ten resolutions for the industry.

READ MORE

note: cartoon network cancelled this show because girls liked to watch it

I really hope DC gets hundreds of submissions for the Harley Quinn thing that are all just Kate Kane and Maggie Sawyer getting married.

6 Reasons We Need A Wonder Woman Movie         Like, Yesterday.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/sedem/6-reasons-why-there-should-be-a-wonder-woman-movie-cjrb

the more i think about it, the more upset i get

marvel has done two thor movies and has introduced thanos

they are doing guardians

dc is going to do flash, and has built krypton

why are wonder woman and captain marvel so much more tricky

why are they incapable of doing black panther?

why is a movie starring a tree and and a talking raccoon alongside live action characters considered EASIER than a straight forward wonder woman movie?

"Your superheroes are not all straight white men" -- A MASTERLIST

List of *current* titles headlined by people of color, women, and queer characters:

[I was thinking about team books. Some teams do have a decent diverse roster. Eventually I settled on including those that do not have straight white men exceeding one-third of the member roster.]

Titles in bold italics are now raking in less than 21,000 copies per month currently. I made this list bc often I heard people comment that they do not know such a title exist, due to less prominent marketing or whatever, and therefore the low sales led them to be canceled.

Likes are nice, but reblog to signal boost.

(If this post ever gets cut off, remember to reblog as text!)

DC/Marvel Mashed Up Heroes & Villians by Eric Guzman / Blog

[internal screaming]

Go read the rest of the article, which is a good summary of what’s been going on. I just wanted to mention, since he’s not listed in the article, that we met the creator of Ghost Rider Gary Friedrich at New York Comic Con. When we asked him what he thought of the movies, he told us that not only did he not make a dime from the Ghost Rider movies, Marvel actually went after him for drawing pictures of the character he created at cons to try to make a living. The guy is 68 years old and broke, and just wanted a piece of the millions of dollars Marvel was making off a character he created before he even signed a contract with them, and they sued him. He ended up owing them $17000 in legal fees (which was recently overturned, after even more litigation).

Anyway: Marvel and DC are a bag of dicks, and copyright law is deeply stupid.

Meet Your (Possibly) New Batman in the Justice League Movie

Warner Bros. is pushing hard to get a Justice League movie to the screen. Yesterday reports had Zack Snyder suggesting that his upcoming Man of Steel will likely tie into the movie. Makes sense. Cavill took time to find and money has been poured into the movie. Unless the studios screenings are awful (and that doesn’t seem to be the case) he’ll be Superman.

But what of Batman? Warner Bros. just came off a hugely successful trilogy with Christian Bale as the Dark Knight. But it’s long been known he won’t be back and the studio plans to reboot the series.

But who will play Batman? Rumors had Armie Hammer, once cast in George Miller’s planned Justice League movie, once again winning the role.

But today comes another report. And it is both surprising and makes total sense. Will fans will like it? I think its going to be divisive.

Who is it?

Read More

I know some people are freaking out over this, but personally, I LIKE continuity and I think something fresh and new would be cool for a Justice League movie. Of course, I love Bruce Wayne. He’s my favorite forever and always. But tieing in worlds, watching movies and characters clash together in exciting ways after knowing of their tales before….that’s what you would call movie magic. And besides, I know DC has been screwing up as of recent, but I don’t consider this a screw up. I consider it bold and innovative.

So, yea. I’m all aboard this if it comes into light.

I saw the picture under the cut and shouted "Yessssss!" with an actual real-life fistpump. So I think that makes my opinions on the subject quite clear.

My reservations about the upcoming Superman movie aside, I hope a JLA movie comes to fruition, and that it works in the Nolanverse somehow, even if the above-mentioned rumor is untrue.