Newsarama interviewed some of the creators, including Park and Barbara Lien-Cooper, who entered Tokyopop's comics contest. Heidi MacDonald comments on the ongoing Platinum and Tokyopop stories and Lea Hernandez weighs in again on the Tokyopop contracts.
While I'll admit I do get annoyed at the more judgmental commentators on these stories, I do think that work-for-hire contracts giving the publisher the copyright to original material is horribly horribly wrong for comics. It's great for companies interested in amassing IP for sales to Hollywood. But that IP-centric model -- especially when such companies don't really get around to publishing comics -- somedays it seems a lot like the company that buys up a lot of patents without any intent to actually manufacture anything.
ComixTalk is not responsible for comments, blog and forum posts. News and ComixTalk Magazine articles are copyright by their respective authors.
ComixTalk, its websites and logos are ©2003-2009 | Managing Editor: Xaviar Xerexes | Site Design: Mind Faucet
Comments
Re: What's In Your Copyright?
Re: What's In Your Copyright?
I think this is similar to traditional book deals, only not so onerous. Book publishers pay very little for new untested authors. Steven King had bad deals until he became popular enough to turn the tables.
With luck, comics creators can take a cue from the Image guys. Start off small, and then grab the cash if they become popular. There is an article in this months "Complex" (June/July 2008) that talks about some independant comics creators who got seven figure deals from Hollywood to adapt their comics. Bottom line, I suppose, is be true to your heart when you create, and always watch the $$MONEY$$.
Re: What's In Your Copyright?
The Image guys, though, had the benefit of being superstars within the Marvel system by working on the franchise titles (the X-books and Spider-Man), and thus had less risk of going independent. If some of the less well known artists had jumped ship (including, at the time, Mark Bagley), I think chances are high that they would have landed flat on their backs and deep in debt. It's even harder for these potential TokyoPop because 1) they're operating in a genre that doesn't look favorably upon those not in Japan, and 2) no one knows who they are.
I'm not saying that there's no money to be made by going independent. I'm just saying the Image creators would be a poor example to follow.
Re: What's In Your Copyright?
I agree that the Image guys would be poor examples to try to follow for several reasons. As you stated they were already popular from their Marvel experience, and they had profit sharing money to finance Image. What I was trying to point out is that they were not always famous. It took hard work ( I imagine - I was not there ) to build their skills to the point where they could get the jobs and then they had to continue the work to succeed. Jim Lee was not always Jim Lee. Steven King was not always Steven King!
I think this is what I was trying to communicate. Ground level is the starting point for everyone. Through hard work, luck, and some other factors ( it's not WHAT you know, it's WHO you know ) creators build up their audience to the point where they can stop accepting whatever the publishers dole out and start taking what should have been theirs from the beginning.
Re: What's In Your Copyright?
I think, that it is shady to cap one's cut. Recently I have been hearing a lot of bad things about TP.