Friday, July 29, 2011

NY judge: Marvel wins Spider-Man, X-Men lawsuit

NEW YORK (AP) — Spider-Man, X-Men, Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk can save the world from evil through superhuman feats, but it took a federal judge Thursday to decide who legally owns the rights to their lucrative characters.

U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon ruled that they and other Marvel Worldwide Inc. superheroes will remain the property of the company, despite claims by heirs to the artist who played a key role in creating them that they are entitled to the copyrights.

The Manhattan judge cited statements made by artist Jack Kirby before his 1994 death to support her finding that his creations must remain Marvel's property.

She noted that he said in a 1986 affidavit that he did his work at a time when it was common practice that vested ownership of his creations belonged to the company that paid him to draw. She said he also signed a written agreement in the spring of 1972, well after the creation of the characters, admitting that he was not entitled to retain ownership of the work.

Marvel filed a federal lawsuit in January 2010 seeking to invalidate 45 notices sent by Kirby's heirs to try to terminate Marvel's copyrights, effective on dates ranging from 2014 through 2019. The comics were published between 1958 and 1963. Those at issue in the case included The Fantastic Four, The Incredible Hulk, The Mighty Thor, Spider-Man, Iron Man, The X-Men, The Avengers, Ant-Man, Nick Fury and The Rawhide Kid.

Marvel had said the work was done "for hire," a legal term that would render the heirs' claims invalid. McMahon said the plain language of contracts she reviewed made it clear that all of Kirby's work for publications owned by Marvel was work for hire. She said the 1909 copyright law that applies to the case presumed that Marvel was considered the author and owner of Kirby's creations because the characters were made at Marvel's expense.

McMahon said the case had parallels to one involving a book about Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower's account of World War II. A federal appeals court concluded in that case that the book was created at the expense of the publisher and thus was a work for hire.

"Like Eisenhower, Kirby took on none of the risks of the success of the many comic books he helped produce. His contribution to the enterprise was plainly critical, but Marvel, not he, bore the risk of its failure," she wrote.

A lawyer for the Kirby family did not immediately return a telephone call for comment. Kirby is survived by his wife and their four children.

In a statement, The Walt Disney Co., which purchased Marvel in 2009, said: "We are pleased that in this case, the judge has confirmed Marvel's ownership."

___

Follow Larry Neumeister at http://twitter.com/Lneumeister

Stolen from J.S. Wayne

Writer: (n) A supernatural creature with the ability to alchemically transform caffeine, nicotine, and a dictionary into literature.

J.S. Wayne [Red Roses and Shattered Glass,available now at www.nobleromance. com or www.amazon.com!]

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Lucas loses UK battle over stormtrooper helmets by JILL LAWLESS - Associated Press | AP

LONDON (AP) — The Empire has struck out.

Britain's Supreme Court on Wednesday defeated a bid by George Lucas' company to stop a prop designer making and selling replicas of the iconic stormtrooper helmets from the "Star Wars" films. The court did, however, prevent him from selling them in the United States.

Andrew Ainsworth sculpted the white helmets worn by the sinister galactic warriors in the original "Star Wars" film in 1977, and now sells replica costumes, made from the original molds, over the Internet. Lucasfilm Ltd. has been trying for years to stop him, in a battle that has climbed through the British courts.

Lucasfilm's lawyers argued that the stormtrooper suits are sculptures and therefore works of art covered by British copyright law. Two lower courts ruled in 2008 and 2009 that the costumes were props, not artworks, and so covered by a much shorter copyright period that has now expired.

The country's highest court on Wednesday upheld those decisions. The panel of five judges said "it was the 'Star Wars' film that was the work of art that Mr. Lucas and his companies created. The helmet was utilitarian in the sense that it was an element in the process of production of the film."

But the judges agreed with Lucasfilm's lawyers — and a lower court — that Ainsworth had violated Lucas's copyright in the United States by selling costumes there.

Ainsworth's attorney, Seamus Andrew, said that means the designer may have to pay damages to Lucasfilm for the U.S. sales, but they are likely to be minor because he did not sell much merchandise there. The judges said Ainsworth had sold between $8,000 and $30,000 worth of goods in the U.S.

Andrew said that on the broader issue, "our client won, without a doubt."

He said the Supreme Court had been asked: "Could our client continue to manufacture and sell replica helmets and suits of armor without any form of license from George Lucas? And he can."

Ainsworth, 62, said he was delighted.

"I am proud to report that in the English legal system David can prevail against Goliath if his cause is right," he said. "If there is a Force, then it has been with me these past five years."

Lucasfilm said that "unfortunately" the court had upheld an "anomaly of British copyright law under which the creative and highly artistic works made for use in films — which are protected by the copyright laws of virtually every other country in the world — may not be entitled to copyright protection in the U.K."

The eminent Supreme Court judges may be experts in law, but their ruling revealed gaps in their knowledge of science fiction. The judgment said the "Star Wars" movies are set "in an imaginary, science-fiction world of the future."

Film fans know that they take place "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away."

Monday, July 18, 2011

The Good Old Days: Pre-Internet Sex—Prairie Family Whores

Two concepts that never mix quite properly in our mind’s eye are Sex and Old West. Think about those two things … together. You’re still inclined, or trained, well, we all are, to never really think of those two … together. Yeah, the men are aloof, tough and say “Yes, ma’am”; plus, the women are all either virgins—whether girls or women—or clean and happy whores.

But, then there’s human nature, reality, and taxes; more on these later.

Good Whore
[Good whore "Miss Kitty" with "friend"
Marshall Matt Dillon in TV's "Gunsmoke"]


Although I love his characters, American author Louis L’Amour (1908-88), king of the cowboy story, with his lone man against the elements and against other men (That’s gay!), and of course the one lone woman, in which he shows masculine, but gentlemanly interest.

She’s now a widow and clearly destined to be with “lone man,” after the book, while she’s presently living, uh, stranded on the prairie, alone, because her stupid and missing husband has actually gotten himself killed in an accident, after moving her out into the wide, flat nowhere, where any stray rapist male or wild animal (Hm, the same thing?) might….

Two sexless, American western frontier people, who are probably wearing out their wet, little fingers and hairy, hard palms far out of sight of violent but sexless L’Amour’s typewriter.

We’ve been encouraged by film and elementary history, but human nature negates our teachings. That long ago life was much less like sexless Gunsmoke and closer to “there’s sex in this story; but we don’t really dwell too much on it” with sweetie, white teen Natalie Wood being kidnapped, from the prairie, as a little girl (little sister in a pinafore Lana Wood) and sexed up by a “blue-eyed faux,” middle aged red Indian—.

“Oh, the mixing of the races and premature, not properly married under a Christian ceremony! Rescue her so we can humiliate her. But, at least she’s not preg—.” In John Ford’s The Searchers.

Unknown Old West Deadwood, Arizona prostitute
[Unknown Deadwood, Arizona prostitute]
http://www.legendsofamerica.com/sd-deadwoodpaintedladies.html]


Nope, those long ago days are closer to HBO’s Deadwood meets Little House; Bowdlerized, cleansed for youth fiction commerce and general-rated American entertainment; our descendants purifying the family links.

In 1865, newspaper editor Horace Greeley said, “Go West, young man,” and his words were a major drive for decades, along with found gold, silver, old growth timber, and the general advertising of adventuring, which sent men west.

And when these men got West, they discovered their cocks were hard, dry, and cuntless; since they’d left wives and girlfriends back East, because adventurin’ was man’s work (Fun!!!) or because they felt they hadn’t enough gold, silver, or whatever to afford a “good” woman, or any woman, as wife.

“Women are expensive, boy; but shore are convenien’, when the gonads get to achin’.”

So in a land filled with squaw rapists looking for white meat, enter adventurous women, desperate women, or women abandoned, or whatever. They came West, too.

Some “found men,” like a “good” woman should, to “take care of” them, way out in the middle of nowhere, far out on the scratchy, dusty, yards deep sod where stray, lonely men occasionally stop in for hospitality and a woman cooked meal….

John Ford again, with his half blind, eye patched view, and with a song and a passing of the jug, too. Or would that be a passing of the jugs.

Actress Megan Fox dressed to play old west prostitute in
[Actress Megan Fox as old west prostitute for film "Jonah Hex"
http://chud.com/articles/content_images/5/meganfoxjonahhex.jpg]


Well, think about all that western stuff in our heads and synthesize it with true human nature, and the cold reality of self- and family-interest/survival. What’s more important to them, raised on the Holy Bible, especially the mean Old Testament, which talked about a host protecting omnipotent Angels from violent and sexual men by pushing his own daughters out to these men, which he did. Gladly.

Yes, this is in the Old Testament and there’s a thing of ancient hospitality and a general disrespect in the Bible for sex-aged women, too; but that’s another comment.

What was more important to those in the Old West, because our grandparents spouted that same kind of reasoning, such as giving charity, but never accepting it.

Do you think these men ever wanted to suffer the humiliation of returning—unsuccessful and whipped—to their old eastern homes, as masculine failures? With their hand out for: charity, food, and a roof over their heads?

What wouldn’t they do to prevent that?

Greeley was a city guy, and probably never farmed a day in his life. Farming’s hard and weather erratic, cattle ranching, too; what is safely consistent are a man’s needs: drink, food, occupation, and women, well, something or someone in which to stick his cock.

Which makes him start to think and reason when his single friends come to his soddy house and eventually get around to asking, then begging, provided they’re nice and not overly violent enough to just take:

“Can I fuck your wife, please, please, please. I’d let you fuck my wife. How about the girl, she’s small; but at full woman’s price, a bargain.”

So, what’s more important to a husband and father, like that: not appearing to be or actually becoming a failure? Or their wife or daughter’s “purity,” “honor,” “innocence”?

“…pay your taxes, finally put down payment on that new plow blade.”

It’s a heartbreaking bit of reality, after all that virginity, Bible talk they were raised on, to find they’re not with fantasy King Solomon worshipping his fantasy woman but locked in the reality of what aloof, tough frontier men can really be like, when they’re cunt deprived, and you have a cunt.

And dad needs cash not grain, not cows, to pay the taxes, or the bank, or he loses everything.

“One hour with the girl.”

Or dad’s found that working a farm or ranch is harder than he thought, being a city kid, who “went West.”

“Forty-five minutes?”

Or he has done it before, but this isn’t lush Ohio with perfect farming land, this is cutting through yards of hard saw grass, pounded down by a few million years of tons of bison herds, before you can even get to the great farm land way beneath it. Oh, yeah, and the grasshoppers and locusts will eat all your grain you’re growing, so you have nothing to feed the cows or sell for cash.

“Fifteen minutes and I’ll marry her, if I get her with child.”

The frontier was a place where women died before their time, or prayed they would, because of the hard work, roving men, and bad birthing techniques, plus refusal of men to wear condoms (Just like many today! And those were the really thick kind then; but, that wasn’t the reason.).

Old West sod house family
[Old West prairie sod house family;
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Rawding_family_sod_house.jpg]


“Good” women, if they knew what they were for, would refuse to have condoms, or “French Letters,” in their presence because men only wore those with whores, and a “good” woman’s not a whore. Of course not, she’s a yearly baby making machine, who’ll be replaced with a new wife to tend all her kids she left behind, when her uterus explodes and bleeds her out dead.

Ick. But true.

“What did you say? How much you’ll pay me, f-for…?”

“Steve’s interested, too. And Whitey. You could make serious progress on that bull stud.”

And, not so suddenly, your fourteen or so aged daughter is old enough for marriage, which her wedding trousseau will cost you.

Or her whoring, which pays you.

But, gentle reader, don’t think of a fourteen or twelve year old in that time as a teenager or adolescent, because both terms in the manner in which we use them, as implying a time between childhood and adulthood, which is extended childhood not true adulthood, didn’t exist then.

You were a child; you were grown. Children in England, in the 1800s could give consent for sex and sell their bodies at age eight or (If luckier?) begin their work lives in general. At least this way, it stays in the family.

—Neale Sourna