Gaiman v. McFarlane 2010: It Is Ordered ...

[This is part of my running report on the 2010 hearing on the Neil Gaiman v. Todd McFarlane case. To see coverage from the beginning, click here. For additional historical perspective, check out The Comics Chronicles' look back on Spawn #9 and the sales impact the "guest-author" issues had on the series.]

Part Twenty-Five Senior U.S. District Judge for the 7th Circuit Court for the Western District of Wisconsin Barbara B. Crabb announced her decision on July 29: "IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Neil Gaiman's motion for an order to compel discovery relating to the money earned from derivative characters Dark Ages (McFarlane) Spawn, Domina and Tiffany is GRANTED. Defendants Todd McFarlane, Todd McFarlane Productions, Inc. and TMP International, Inc. are to produce the requested information promptly and in no event later than September 1, 2010."

The decision came in Case #02-CV-48-BBC, Neil Gaiman, Marvels & Miracles LLC vs. Todd McFarlane, Todd McFarlane Productions, TMP International and Image Comics. It had been determined that Neil Gaiman had been co-creator with Todd McFarlane of Spawn #9 and, with that issue, the characters of Count Cogliostro, Medieval Spawn, and warrior angel Angela. The current suit involved the ownership of characters that had appeared over the years in McFarlane's "Spawn" titles, specifically "Dark Ages Spawn" and warrior angels "Tiffany" and "Domina."

In her opinion, Crabb wrote, "The parties agree that they are co-owners of Angela and Medieval Spawn. Defendants do not contest plaintiff's right to an accounting and division of profits for the posters, trading cards, clothing, statuettes, animated series on HBO, video games, etc. that feature those characters. The dispute is limited to information about the profits earned from Dark Ages Spawn, Tiffany and Domina, which defendant has refused to provide to plaintiff. Defendants contend that these characters are not subject to plaintiff's copyright because they were based solely on plaintiff's ideas and not on any physical expression of those ideas. I conclude that the newer characters are derivative and that plaintiff is entitled to his share of the profits realized by these characters and to the immediate production of all documents and other information material to the calculation of the profits."

Her opinion noted some of the details of the storylines. For example, "The Dark Ages (McFarlane) Spawn is [like Medieval (Gaiman) Spawn] a twelfth century knight, referred to as The Black Knight, killed in a holy crusade far from his homeland and returned to Earth as Hellspawn. (In the first issue in which he is introduced, he is described as having been born in 901, tr. exh. 26, inside front cover; in future issues and in advertising for the comics and his action figure, he is described as having been born in the twelfth century.)"

She summarized the appearance of the angel characters: "Tiffany and Domina are visually similar to Angela and share her same basic traits. All three are warrior angels with voluptuous physiques, long hair and mask-like eye makeup. all three wear battle uniforms consisting of thong bikinis, garters, wide weapon belts, elbow-length gloves and ill-fitting armor bras." She compared the two Spawns of the middle ages: "Defendant argues that when the court disregards the elements of Medieval (Gaiman) Spawn that are derived from the original Spawn and the stock elements that accompany a person of aristocratic lineage in the middle ages, such as traveling on horseback, wearing armor and carrying a weapon, every other aspect of Dark Ages (McFarlane) Spawn is new and different from Medieval (Gaiman) Spawn. It is true that Dark Ages (McFarlane) Spawn and Medieval (Gaiman) Spawn differ slightly in their backgrounds, but these are elements of their characters that make them individually copyrightable, not ones that prevent Dark Ages (McFarlane) Spawn from being found derivative. It is more significant that Dark Ages Spawn has the distinctive look of Medieval (Gaiman) Spawn that would cause any reader, casual or constant, to see a substantial similarity between them." She went on to discuss the basic concept of the series, then wrote, "Much as defendant tries to distinguish the two knight Hellspawn, he never explains why, of all the universe of possible Hellspawn incarnations, he introduced two knights from the same century. Not only does this break the Hellspawn 'rule' that Malebolgia never returns a Hellspawns [sic] to Earth more than once every 400 years (or possibly every 100 years, as suggested in Spawn, No. 9, exh. #1, at 4), it suggests that what defendant really wanted to do was exploit the possibilities of the knight introduced in issue no. 9. (This possibility is supported by the odd timing of defendant's letter to plaintiff on February 14, 1999, just before publication of the first issue of Spawn: The Dark Ages, to the effect that defendant was rescinding their previous agreements and retaining all rights to Medieval (Gaiman) Spawn.)"

She then elaborated with concepts of her own, not expressed during the June 14 testimony: "If defendant really wanted to differentiate the new Hellspawn, why not make him a Portugese explorer in the 16th century; an officer of the royal Navy in the 18th century, an idealistic recruit of Simon Bolivar in the 19th century, a companion of Odysseus on his voyages, a Roman gladiator, a younger brother of Emperor Nakamikado in the early 18th century, a Spanish conquistador, an aristocrat in the Qing dynasty, an American Indian warrior or a member of the court of Queen Elizabeth I? It seems far more than coincidence that Dark Ages (McFarlane) Spawn is a knight from the same century as Medieval (Gaiman) Spawn."


She wrote that it was irrelevant whether Spawn: The Dark Ages writer Brian Holguin had tried to base his Dark Ages (McFarlane) Spawn on Medieval (Gaiman) Spawn. "... what is relevant is that he had access to Medieval (Gaiman) Spawn before he created his version of the middle ages knight." She cited earlier court decisions including the 1977 case decision "holding that George Harrison had access to tune he used for 'He's So Fine'; therefore, even if copying was subconscious, it amounted to infringement." "The small differences in the two knights do not undermine a finding of derivation ... It is not, as defendent claims, a simple borrowing of an idea but a borrowing of the expression of ideas of the copyright owners. It would be considered infringing if it had been developed by anyone not working for defendent." She said the same applied to the other angels. "Certainly they are similar enough to be infringing if they had been produced and sold by someone other than the copyright owners. The totality of their attributes and traits, that is, their visual appearance, their costumes, their manner of speaking, their activities and their common origin (Heaven's angelic phalanx), mark them as derivative of Angela."

Next

Read more...

Gaiman v. McFarlane 2010: Post-Hearing Briefs in Brief

[This is part of my running report on the 2010 hearing on the Neil Gaiman v. Todd McFarlane case. To see coverage from the beginning, click here.]

Part Twenty-Three Following the June 14 evidentiary hearing, attorneys for Neil Gaiman and Todd McFarlane filed post-hearing briefs running more than a dozen pages each in support of their respective positions. In the words of the McFarlane attorneys, "The issue this Court is being asked to decide is whether Neil Gaiman is entitled to a share of profits attributable to characters known as Dark Ages Spawn, Tiffany and Domina. ... In the accounting process, there is no dispute that Mr. Gaiman is entitled to a share of profits from the comics in which the characters Medieval Spawn or Angela appeared or from derivative uses of those characters, such as action figures created of those characters. Mr. Gaiman now argues that he is entitled to a share of profits from other characters ... Mr. Gaiman's theory is that these other characters - Dark Ages Spawn, Tiffany and Domina - are derivative of the co-owned characters." In the words of the Gaiman attorneys, "The visual and literary similarities between the characters are far too striking to be brushed off as coincidences or merely similar 'ideas.' Under the law, a character is derivative if it would be an infringement when used by an unauthorized party. ... There can be no question that if anyone else had created comics using Tiffany, Domina, or Dark Ages Spawn, the McFarlane Defendants would have sued them for infringement of their copyrights in the Angela and Medieval Spawn characters, and won."

Each group of attorneys detailed the arguments for their side, citing testimony given during the June 14 hearing. Tomorrow, presumably before Judge Crabb announces her decision, I'll cite the lessons I have learned from all this. Then, we'll wait for the decision.

Next

Read more...

Gaiman v. McFarlane 2010: Scantily Clad Angels

[This is part of my running report on the 2010 hearing in the Neil Gaiman v. Todd McFarlane case. To see coverage from the beginning, click here.]

Part Fourteen Todd McFarlane's attorney Alex Grimsley asked whether Neil Gaiman had collaborated with other writers on a series. Gaiman said, "I did a book called The Children's Crusade which I ... wrote sort of book-ends and worked with a number of writers: Jamie DeLillo, Alisa Kwitney, Rachel Pollack, Nancy Collins, and many others. ... And ... my most recent comics work was a two-parter last year where I got to kill Batman." It was Batman: Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader? - drawn by Andy Kubert. He described it as "the last Batman issue of Detective Comics and Batman Comics, and on that level you're kind of collaborating with 70 years of people who have written Batman and the people who are writing it now." However, Grimsley's next questions, which started with asking whether Pollack could have created an angel without being derivative of Angela, were objected to as calling for a legal conclusion, and the objections were sustained.

Grimsley turned to Spawn Bible and the page devoted to Tiffany: "Tiffany has ... on her right leg ... what appears to be like a little ammunition belt?" Gaiman responded, "I thought it was chocolates, but it could be ammunition. It could be anything." Grimsley asked, "Did you ever write anything or have any drawings where the angel used a gun?" "No." Grimsley showed another picture of Tiffany in which she was holding a gun. Gaiman said, "I don't believe somebody becomes less derivative of another character if they pick up a gun. Batman is still Batman if he's holding a gun." Grimsley went on, "And Tiffany has some sort of wing on her back. It looks like blades, correct?" "Yes." "She doesn't have the headpiece that Angela wore?" "No." "Both of these characters ... are, I guess to put it mildly, scantily clad?" "Yes." "Is it common in modern comic books to portray women scantily clad?" "Not the ones that I write." "OK, but putting aside the hadful that you write, is it fairly common?" "No." "No?" Gaiman said, "I was the editor this year of Year's Best American Comics and I read an awful lot of comics and most of them had fully clad women. I will accept there may be some comics out there with scantily clad women, but, no, I don't believe it's the norm." Grimsley said, "Well, when we're using the adjective 'scantily clad,' do you consider Wonder Woman to be fully clothed or scantily clad?" Gaiman said, "I haven't read a Wonder Woman comic in 10 years. I have no idea what she's wearing currently. Throughout her history, it has moved backwards and forwards. At one point in the '60s and '70s, she was in a trouser suit. The costumes vary."

Grimsley referred to a copy of Previews and asked Gaiman to describe the purpose of Previews, which he did. Then Grimsley displayed a page and asked whether Gaiman would describe them as scantily clad or fully clad. [I've tried to locate this specific copy of Previews without success. I believe the first image was of the Image title C.H.I.X., which was dated January 1998. In fact, as far as I could determine, most of the pages he chose in these samplings were from the Image listings of such series as Savage Dragon, and at least one was a special "swimsuit issue."] "Of the ones on here," Gaiman said, "one of them appears to be wearing fishnet bondage gear. One of them looks like Power Girl, who is a Superman knockoff in a cape. And one of them is a weird manga thing. I'm not even sure if she's - what she's - wearing. Are they fully dressed? No, they're wearing spandex." After a further sampling, Gaiman said, "I can absolutely, utterly, with my hand on my heart, testify that the ladies in those pictures in those ads that you showed me weren't wearing very much - nor were the men. Beyond that, I think generalizing the comics is deeply problematic."

Grimsley returned to differences between Angela and Tiffany and discussed differences between hair styles and that the headdress of Domina isn't the same as that of Angela. Gaiman said, "There are lots of different headdresses."

Next

Read more...

Gaiman v. McFarlane 2010: Similar Angels

Part Eight [This is part of my running report on the 2010 hearing in the Neil Gaiman v. Todd McFarlane case. To see coverage from the beginning, click here.] Arntsen turned to a comparison of the angels Gaiman had co-created with the angels involved in the Spawn storyline in #97 (July 2000) through #100 (November 2000). He quoted dialogue from a page in #99 (September 2000), which read, "By Elysium! The heavenly hosts!" and asked Gaiman, "What is that a reference to?" Gaiman responded, "Elysium was the place that they lived, and the heavenly hosts were the 333,000 kick-ass lady warrior angels." Asked, "Were those elements that you created?" Gaiman replied, "Yes." Going on to #100 and displaying one of the last pages, Arntsen asked, "Can you recognize what's being shown there?" "Spawn holding Angela's dead body while all of the other heavenly hosts of kick-ass lady warrior angels who look a bit like her stand around in the air." Arntsen then referred to images of other angels and asked Gaiman to describe similarities between Angela and Domina. "They are dressed incredibly similarly and they have the same facial stuff, very similar hair. Slightly different headpieces. I don't know, I would have assumed that this was one of the variant Angelas. ... Todd did a lot of Angelas in different costumes ... and changed the way she looked as a toy. I would have thought it was one of those." Gaiman was asked to describe another Domina picture that was in evidence, and he answered, "Same loincloth, things wrapped around the leg, weaponry, slightly different upper-body straps, but very similar costume."

Arntsen showed an image of Tiffany from Spawn Bible (August 1996). [It's shown here along with the entry for Angela in the same comic book.] Gaiman said, "That's a page of Tiffany, who's another one of the warrior angels: sharp shoulder points and blonder and sort of hair that goes up and explodes, rather than goes down, but there's sort of long hair around the back. Same knee things, same loincloth and thong and big belt and heavy shoulderpiece. And also the weaponry." Asked to compare that drawing of Tiffany to the drawing of Angela for Spawn #9, Gaiman said, "Similar pose, very similar character. Again, the hair color is very different, and Angela has sort of the Viking wings as a headpiece, which Tiffany doesn't. But they're obviously very similar characters. The facial thing - the sort of masky face thing - is the same, and the style is the same."

Next

Read more...