Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Captain Marvel isn't a Superman copy. DC sued because Cap was kicking their ass sales wise and got butt hurt over it.
He's not an exact clone, but clearly based on him...
And now we have Gladiator, Majestic, and so many characters that are much more obvious clones..
Kind of puts into perspective how arbitrarily broken the ip protection laws really are.
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Captain Marvel isn't a Superman copy. DC sued because Cap was kicking their ass sales wise and got butt hurt over it.
By late 1939, Fawcett began expanding into a line of comics, which launched in February 1940, the same month “Captain Billy” passed away. As the story goes, in 1939 Roscoe Kent Fawcett commanded his crew to create a character like Superman, only with an identity of a boy aged 10 to 12. This wording would come back to haunt the company many times over.
http://www.newsarama.com/comics/oral-history-captain-marvel-1-101224.html
National filed suit against Fawcett in September 1941.[1] The lawsuit between National and Fawcett proceeded for seven years before trial finally began in 1948. National's argument was that Captain Marvel's main powers and characteristics (super-strength, super-speed, invulnerability, a skin-tight costume with a cape, and a news reporter alter ego) were derived directly from those of Superman. Fawcett's counterargument was that although the two characters were indeed similar, and Superman's publication debut predated Captain Marvel's by eighteen months, the differences in essential plot and concept elements (Captain Marvel's alter-ego was a child, not an adult; his powers were magic-based, not science-based) meant that Captain Marvel was not an infringement of National's copyrighted character, but a property in its own right.
The trial was decided in Fawcett's favor because of information Fawcett's lawyers had uncovered about Superman's copyright status. The defense lawyers provided evidence that National Comics and the McClure Syndicate failed to copyright several of their Superman newspaper comic strips, and the trial judge decided that National had abandoned its Superman copyright such that it was no longer valid. The trial judge did find, however, that Captain Marvel was an illegal copy of National's Superman.
Appeal
National appealed the decision in 1951 to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, with famed Judge Learned Hand presiding. Judge Hand's 1952 ruling in National's favor reversed the trial court's decision. National's Superman copyright was held valid, and the finding that Captain Marvel was an infringement of that copyright was affirmed. The case was then remanded to the trial court for damage assessment. Instead of appealing the Second Circuit's decision, Fawcett decided to settle with National out of court. Superhero comics sales had decreased dramatically during the early 1950s, and Fawcett decided that it was not worthwhile to continue fighting National. National agreed to settle with Fawcett out of court, and Fawcett paid National $400,000 in damages and agreed to cease publication of all Captain Marvel-related comics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Comics_Publications_v._Fawcett_Publications
Originally posted by cdtm
He's not an exact clone, but clearly based on him...And now we have Gladiator, Majestic, and so many characters that are much more obvious clones..
Kind of puts into perspective how arbitrarily broken the ip protection laws really are.
How clearly is clearly? He's not a clone, period.
He has super strength, super speed, flight (which he did first), invulnerability (to a greater degree than Superman did originally). Cap also pioneered the "family" aspect of superheros with the Marvel Family and introduced Dr. Sivana first, a precursor to Lex Luthor.
Billy Batson's origin is nothing like Clark's. Neither is their source of power, their overall book's themes, etc.
It was an attempt by DC to beat the competition and Fawcett settled rather than whittle away their money fighting in court.
I don't see how anyone can honestly look at Captain Marvel and think he's a copy of Superman when he's radically different when you get right down to it.
Originally posted by shokosugi
By late 1939, Fawcett began expanding into a line of comics, which launched in February 1940, the same month “Captain Billy” passed away.[b] As the story goes, in 1939 Roscoe Kent Fawcett commanded his crew to create a character like Superman, only with an identity of a boy aged 10 to 12. This wording would come back to haunt the company many times over.http://www.newsarama.com/comics/oral-history-captain-marvel-1-101224.html
National filed suit against Fawcett in September 1941.[1] The lawsuit between National and Fawcett proceeded for seven years before trial finally began in 1948. National's argument was that Captain Marvel's main powers and characteristics (super-strength, super-speed, invulnerability, a skin-tight costume with a cape, and a news reporter alter ego) were derived directly from those of Superman. Fawcett's counterargument was that although the two characters were indeed similar, and Superman's publication debut predated Captain Marvel's by eighteen months, the differences in essential plot and concept elements (Captain Marvel's alter-ego was a child, not an adult; his powers were magic-based, not science-based) meant that Captain Marvel was not an infringement of National's copyrighted character, but a property in its own right.
The trial was decided in Fawcett's favor because of information Fawcett's lawyers had uncovered about Superman's copyright status. The defense lawyers provided evidence that National Comics and the McClure Syndicate failed to copyright several of their Superman newspaper comic strips, and the trial judge decided that National had abandoned its Superman copyright such that it was no longer valid. The trial judge did find, however, that Captain Marvel was an illegal copy of National's Superman.
Appeal
National appealed the decision in 1951 to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, with famed Judge Learned Hand presiding. Judge Hand's 1952 ruling in National's favor reversed the trial court's decision. National's Superman copyright was held valid, and the finding that Captain Marvel was an infringement of that copyright was affirmed. The case was then remanded to the trial court for damage assessment. Instead of appealing the Second Circuit's decision, Fawcett decided to settle with National out of court. Superhero comics sales had decreased dramatically during the early 1950s, and Fawcett decided that it was not worthwhile to continue fighting National. National agreed to settle with Fawcett out of court, and Fawcett paid National $400,000 in damages and agreed to cease publication of all Captain Marvel-related comics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Comics_Publications_v._Fawcett_Publications [/B]
You can quote Wikipedia? Cool? 👆
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
How clearly is clearly? He's not a clone, period.He has super strength, super speed, flight (which he did first), invulnerability (to a greater degree than Superman did originally). Cap also pioneered the "family" aspect of superheros with the Marvel Family and introduced Dr. Sivana first, a precursor to Lex Luthor.
Billy Batson's origin is nothing like Clark's. Neither is their source of power, their overall book's themes, etc.
It was an attempt by DC to beat the competition and Fawcett settled rather than whittle away their money fighting in court.
I don't see how anyone can honestly look at Captain Marvel and think he's a copy of Superman when he's radically different when you get right down to it.
He's a different take on the character. Just like Green Arrow was intended to be a different take on Batman.
That doesn't devalue the character.
Originally posted by cdtm
He's a different take on the character. Just like Green Arrow was intended to be a different take on Batman.That doesn't devalue the character.
Green Arrow has more similarities to Batman than Cap does to Superman, tbh.
Cap at his core is really nothing like Superman outside of shared physical attributes and being a good guy. At least that's how I see it when you look into the character's history and cast of characters and the stories he's been in.
Originally posted by shokosugi
BUTTHURT
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Captain Marvel isn't a Superman copy. DC sued because Cap was kicking their ass sales wise and got butt hurt over it.
Yeah, like I said, DC comics was butt hurt due to Cap outselling Superman titles which was what spurred them on to sue Fawcett. 🙂
I'm glad you've displayed the ability of recollection.