home

Creating Daredevil (part 1)
J David Spurlock 3 July 2016 CREATING DAREDEVIL: WHO DID WHAT? Patrick Ford To be a bit more specific re. the first section. The Lev Gleason Daredevil stories were still protected by the first 28 year term of copyright when Goodman discovered Lev Gleason had allowed the Trademark on the name, logo, and costume design to lapse. As long as it is continuously used a Trademark can last for ever. However, if a Trademark is not used for a period of three years it is considered abandoned. Lev Gleason went more than three years without publishing or licensing anything to do with Daredevil, Martin Goodman became aware of that and gained control of the Lev Gleason Trademark for Daredevil. J David Spurlock As well as trademark-wise, I think Goodman felt like he was in the clear copyright-wise too (despite the 28 year term) as Gleason was out of business. That would explain Ditko being told he could use the old character if he wanted to. Patrick Ford A costume ( a look) can be trademarked. I noticed this a few years ago studying Warren publications. Jim Warren trademarked not only the title CREEPY, but the image of Uncle Creepy. https://trademarks.justia.com/771/11/uncle-creepy-77111839.html Patrick Ford I've had correspondence with Lev Gleason's nephew Brett Dakin who told me that Lev Gleason tried to legally challenge Goodman's application for the Daredevil trademark. Gleason failed because he had allowed the Daredevil trademark to become legally abandoned. Brett's research on his uncle is awaiting publication. His prior works include Another Quiet American: Stories of Life in Laos: https://www.amazon.com/Another-Quiet-American-Stories-Life-ebook/dp/B0032FO7BI Patrick Ford Reading this over again it occurs to me that I would not agree with the following. David writes, "Marvel's giving Wood so much free-reign autonomy indicates: " Here's where I disagree. Lee did not give Ditko, or Kirby, or Wood, "free-reign" he abused his power as the person in charge of assignments to extort work from them for which they were not paid and Lee was paid. Expecting a person to do your job and then taking the money and credit is in no way "giving free-reign." It's what I would call a kick-back or extortion. And I don't believer the low sales of DAREDEVIL had anything to do with Lee expecting Wood to write the stories while Lee collected the writing money. There is not any doubt in my mind that if DAREDEVIL was selling well Lee would still have expected Wood to write. There is a substantial amount of evidence which indicates that Lee expected (even demanded) that anyone who wanted an art assignment was expected to write without being paid.

home