I wouldn't normally post something like this here, but Alan Dean Foster kicked of the Star Wars EU.
#disneymustpay
That is outragous.... Billion dollar company and hoarding money like a dragon from anyone it can suck dry.
Still don’t think this is the place for these types of posts. Seems more fitting for social media where those things might have a tiny bit of impact...
2 hours ago, DanteRotterdam said:Still don’t think this is the place for these types of posts. Seems more fitting for social media where those things might have a tiny bit of impact...
It's interesting and a talking point nonetheless.
For better or for worse, it’s a long-standing aspect of contracts for work on licensed properties. Comics writer Kurt Busiek discussed it the other day on Twitter, using the Star Wars comics to illustrate. To paraphrase—
- Marvel had the original SW comics license. Creators’ contracts were with Marvel, while ownership of the material was LFL’s due to being licensed material. Under their contract, creators received royalties from Marvel for reprints.
- When Dark Horse obtained the license, those previous creators no longer received reprint royalties, as they had no contract with Dark Horse. Those creating new work received payment and reprint royalties from Dark Horse.
- When Marvel got the license again, Dark Horse creators did not receive reprint royalties, because they had no contract with Marvel. (Busiek did not touch on this, but I’d presume the original Marvel run creators received no more reprint royalties, because those contracts had been nullified when Dark Horse acquired the license.)
In all of these cases, it’s the publisher that’s party to the contract who’s responsible for paying the talent, although the ownership of the material (work made for hire) belongs to the licensor (LFL).
It may suck. It may need to change. And there’s a strong argument to be made for the IP owner to step up if a prominent contributor to the IP is in dire straits (say hi to Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster). But, it’s a long-standing aspect of how such contracts work.
Edited by Nytwyng1 hour ago, Nytwyng said:For better or for worse, it’s a long-standing aspect of contracts for work on licensed properties. Comics writer Kurt Busiek discussed it the other day on Twitter, using the Star Wars comics to illustrate. To paraphrase—
- Marvel had the original SW comics license. Creators’ contracts were with Marvel, while ownership of the material was LFL’s due to being licensed material. Under their contract, creators received royalties from Marvel for reprints.
- When Dark Horse obtained the license, those previous creators no longer received reprint royalties, as they had no contract with Dark Horse. Those creating new work received payment and reprint royalties from Dark Horse.
- When Marvel got the license again, Dark Horse creators did not receive reprint royalties, because they had no contract with Marvel. (Busiek did not touch on this, but I’d presume the original Marvel run creators received no more reprint royalties, because those contracts had been nullified when Dark Horse acquired the license.)
In all of these cases, it’s the publisher that’s party to the contract who’s responsible for paying the talent, although the ownership of the material (work made for hire) belongs to the licensor (LFL).
It may suck. It may need to change. And there’s a strong argument to be made for the IP owner to step up if a prominent contributor to the IP is in dire straits (say hi to Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster). But, it’s a long-standing aspect of how such contracts work.
I had no idea about this before!
I can even understand why the new publisher doesn't pay royalties for those materials, but I absolutely cannot find any sense, why can they still publish it? Fine, don't pay the writer, but don'T use it either.
Things like this make me feel so disappointed for our current way of living...
3 minutes ago, Rimsen said:I can even understand why the new publisher doesn't pay royalties for those materials, but I absolutely cannot find any sense, why can they still publish it? Fine, don't pay the writer, but don'T use it either.
Call me naive, but I would have thought this would have come up thousands of times before (new contract using the material of authors/artists created under an old contract) and thus there would be a publishing law that passed the royalty responsibilities to the new publisher (pointed out in the new contract) IF they used the old material of an author/artist.
12 minutes ago, Rimsen said:I can even understand why the new publisher doesn't pay royalties for those materials, but I absolutely cannot find any sense, why can they still publish it? Fine, don't pay the writer, but don'T use it either.
They can publish it because they’re licensing the rights to the material (in this case, in the comics medium) from the owner of the IP. The licensee can produce new material and reprint existing material in the relevant medium. If there’s a demand for the material, it’ll be reprinted.
Looking closer to “home,” what are the odds that the contributors to the WEG Star Wars RPG got any royalties when FFG reprinted as the 30th anniversary edition?
10 minutes ago, Sturn said:Call me naive, but I would have thought this would have come up thousands of times before (new contract using the material of authors/artists created under an old contract) and thus there would be a publishing law that passed the royalty responsibilities to the new publisher (pointed out in the new contract) IF they used the old material of an author/artist.
I’d guess it depends on the specific terms of the contract(s) involved. Work made for hire contracts don’t often do the creators any favors.
Infamously, in the 80s, DC Comics purchased characters from Charlton comics, and approached writer Alan Moore to pitch a limited series using them. They liked what he came up with, but felt it would leave the characters unusable for too long after its conclusion. So, he created analogous pastiches of the characters, and the book became Watchmen. Part of the contract was that, after the book went out of print for a certain period of time, rights to Watchmen would revert from DC to Moore and artist Dave Gibbons. But, it was such a hit, and demand has remained consistent, that it’s never been out of print since debuting in the mid-80s. Moore has been openly angry about the situation, vowing to never work with DC again, so much so that he was prepared to pull the plug on several creator-owned books when the Image Comics imprint they were under was purchased by DC.
A lawyer that works with the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund is currently doing a deep-dive thread on this sort of contract law on Twitter. It’s still in progress, but I’ll try to remember to summarize and/or link when they’re done.
Yeah, I am SO not even trying to summarize this.
6 hours ago, Nytwyng said:Looking closer to “home,” what are the odds that the contributors to the WEG Star Wars RPG got any royalties when FFG reprinted as the 30th anniversary edition?
If FFG was already owned by Asmodée, then WEG can sue under French copyright laws. And by those laws WEG must receive royalties for the reprint of their works. That includes ALL authors who contributed to those works.
26 minutes ago, WolfRider said:If FFG was already owned by Asmodée, then WEG can sue under French copyright laws. And by those laws WEG must receive royalties for the reprint of their works. That includes ALL authors who contributed to those works.
Of course, that could be affected by WEG making all of the SWRPG content essentially public domain by releasing it online when WEG folded, which is how D6 Holocron can have it openly posted publicly.
Follow up thread...
11 hours ago, Nytwyng said:For better or for worse, it’s a long-standing aspect of contracts for work on licensed properties. Comics writer Kurt Busiek discussed it the other day on Twitter, using the Star Wars comics to illustrate. To paraphrase—
- Marvel had the original SW comics license. Creators’ contracts were with Marvel, while ownership of the material was LFL’s due to being licensed material. Under their contract, creators received royalties from Marvel for reprints.
- When Dark Horse obtained the license, those previous creators no longer received reprint royalties, as they had no contract with Dark Horse. Those creating new work received payment and reprint royalties from Dark Horse.
- When Marvel got the license again, Dark Horse creators did not receive reprint royalties, because they had no contract with Marvel. (Busiek did not touch on this, but I’d presume the original Marvel run creators received no more reprint royalties, because those contracts had been nullified when Dark Horse acquired the license.)
In all of these cases, it’s the publisher that’s party to the contract who’s responsible for paying the talent, although the ownership of the material (work made for hire) belongs to the licensor (LFL).
It may suck. It may need to change. And there’s a strong argument to be made for the IP owner to step up if a prominent contributor to the IP is in dire straits (say hi to Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster). But, it’s a long-standing aspect of how such contracts work.
However, the difference with Foster is that he had the contact with Lucasfilm itself, the owner of the IP , not a licensee. As such the contract itself is still valid.
8 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:However, the difference with Foster is that he had the contact with Lucasfilm itself, the owner of the IP , not a licensee. As such the contract itself is still valid.
Depends on what happened with the contracts during Disney’s acquisitions, as noted in the examination of how these things happen in the CBLDF threads I linked. After all, the Alien novelizations that are also part of the claim certainly weren’t contracted by LFL.
Edited by Nytwyng1 hour ago, Nytwyng said:Depends on what happened with the contracts during Disney’s acquisitions, as noted in the examination of how these things happen in the CBLDF threads I linked. After all, the Alien novelizations that are also part of the claim certainly weren’t contracted by LFL.
No. They were contracted by 20th Century Fox.
2 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:No. They were contracted by 20th Century Fox.
Which is maybe why I said that?
Have you ever resisted the urge to “ackshewally?”
19 hours ago, Nytwyng said:Of course, that could be affected by WEG making all of the SWRPG content essentially public domain by releasing it online when WEG folded, which is how D6 Holocron can have it openly posted publicly.
Still a bit of a difference between openly posted publicly and using it to make money though, right? I mean if the D6 Holocron were selling that material without working out a deal with WEG, it would be a problem, wouldn't it. (IANAL)
1 minute ago, HappyDaze said:Still a bit of a difference between openly posted publicly and using it to make money though, right? I mean if the D6 Holocron were selling that material without working out a deal with WEG, it would be a problem, wouldn't it. (IANAL)
I honestly couldn’t say. That’s why I’ve (at least tried to) made a point of using language like “could,” and “might,” and “maybe.” As was pointed out in the CBLDF thread, even in very similar circumstances, there are variables in play that lawyers get paid well to untangle while we armchair it here on a gaming message board.
6 hours ago, Nytwyng said:Which is maybe why I said that?
Have you ever resisted the urge to “ackshewally?”
Nope. Where would be the fun in that? 😝
5 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:Nope. Where would be the fun in that? 😝
Maybe more civil and engaging conversations with people? Especially when you’re dropping the “ackshewally” and/or the “emphasis” to act like you’re correcting someone by saying the very same thing they did? /shrug
Edited by NytwyngOn 11/19/2020 at 11:48 AM, Nytwyng said:For better or for worse, it’s a long-standing aspect of contracts for work on licensed properties. Comics writer Kurt Busiek discussed it the other day on Twitter, using the Star Wars comics to illustrate. To paraphrase—
- Marvel had the original SW comics license. Creators’ contracts were with Marvel, while ownership of the material was LFL’s due to being licensed material. Under their contract, creators received royalties from Marvel for reprints.
- When Dark Horse obtained the license, those previous creators no longer received reprint royalties, as they had no contract with Dark Horse. Those creating new work received payment and reprint royalties from Dark Horse.
- When Marvel got the license again, Dark Horse creators did not receive reprint royalties, because they had no contract with Marvel. (Busiek did not touch on this, but I’d presume the original Marvel run creators received no more reprint royalties, because those contracts had been nullified when Dark Horse acquired the license.)
In all of these cases, it’s the publisher that’s party to the contract who’s responsible for paying the talent, although the ownership of the material (work made for hire) belongs to the licensor (LFL).
It may suck. It may need to change. And there’s a strong argument to be made for the IP owner to step up if a prominent contributor to the IP is in dire straits (say hi to Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster). But, it’s a long-standing aspect of how such contracts work.
Not relevant to Book Contracts that the Author had contracts directly with Lucasfilm. The Marvel work is work for hire. which works totally different than these contracts.
6 minutes ago, Daeglan said:Not relevant to Book Contracts that the Author had contracts directly with Lucasfilm. The Marvel work is work for hire. which works totally different than these contracts.
Please see later posts and the CBLDF Twitter threads linked. It basically boils down to how the contracts for Disney acquiring Lucasfilm and 20th Century Fox were drawn up (and, for that matter, how the original contracts with LFL and whatever entity commissioned the Alien novel are written). It's possible that the acquisition contracts assigned ownership but not obligation. If that's the case, it still sucks, and it would certainly generate good will in the face of the public response to help Foster out. With none of us having access to the pertinent documents, we're all just armchair quarterbacking here. And, for better or for worse, ethics =/= law.
Edited by Nytwyng57 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:Please see later posts and the CBLDF Twitter threads linked. It basically boils down to how the contracts for Disney acquiring Lucasfilm and 20th Century Fox were drawn up (and, for that matter, how the original contracts with LFL and whatever entity commissioned the Alien novel are written). It's possible that the acquisition contracts assigned ownership but not obligation. If that's the case, it still sucks, and it would certainly generate good will in the face of the public response to help Foster out. With none of us having access to the pertinent documents, we're all just armchair quarterbacking here. And, for better or for worse, ethics =/= law.
No it does not. The original contract supercedes the Disney contracts. they are written to be binding over future owners of Lucas film. Specifically for this reason.