rotiart
Stan Lee Stole my name
So what's the argument exactly. That the guy that was executive editor of DC... While the comic (adventures of xmen #12) was published... Can't indirectly give the DC stamp of approval because the comic was in an official marvel comic? Even though he's referenced in the comic?
That kinda makes sense. Heck I'm pretty sure someone asked Stan Lee who was the most powerful character in marvel and he said Galactus.... What with TOAA, various Celestials, the Fulcrum, Phoenix, he might have not had the official standing of Marvel behind him, but the man is seen as the father of marvel comics...
At the end of the day we could have DC having washed their hands of the whole amalgam affair and transferring all rights to Marvel. Hence why they no longer mention the characters in their stuff...but gave thanks to Mike Carlin for the creative control? Then as of 1997 that would mean Marvels brothers were retconned almost immediately to account for the rights change.
Again this makes sense since marvel references the amalgam universe as an alternate universe.... But how would that mix in with DC and their 52 universe which was all that hypertime.. Or whatever... That arose around the same time.
Personally I'm still flip flopping over whose argument stands... Indirectly I see how Mr master wins the argument based on the sum of all the facts, But directly I see how he loses this one since there is no definitive on panel proof from DC.