Interesting thread regarding VEI character rights

[bamaphilosopher]

Hey, guys, in the Solar, Magnus, Turok by other companies section, there's a thread worthy of a look here on the general thread, I think, because it relates to a question I've had lately, about whether VEI will ever bring Erica Pierce back. It seems Bob Layton has made a claim on facebook that any characters created in the pages of Solar, such as Phil Seleski, would revert back to the original owners of the Solar property. But as folks point out in the thread I've linked, that can't be right, since characters like Harada first appeared in Solar, and Rai first appeared in Magnus. Maybe what Bob Layton meant concerned the name used by the character itself, not other supporting characters in the books.

Again, what makes this interesting, to me, is regarding the future use of Erica Pierce. It seems to me Dynamite would have no right to use her character.

And, is Dynamite still using Phil Seleski, or have they changed the name? It seems to me the prudent thing to do would be to use another name. Why risk a legal battle? I'm sure VEI doesn't care about engaging in a legal battle over "Phil Seleski," of course, as one poster points out. It seems ridiculous of Dynamite, though, IMO.

Anyway, here is the link and discussion:

viewtopic.php?f=43&t=42943" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I hope this doesn't result in a legal battle down the road. I remember a legal battle sunk Jim Shooter's Defiant line. Dynamite better be careful. These are both small publishers...a legal battle could sink the loser.

Just a fan's opinion. I have no knowledge of the actual legal standing of VEI or Dynamite. It just seems to me that this could create a legal conflict down the road.

It certainly seems to me to be thornier than the ridiculous Plasmer/Warriors of Plasm case Marvel brought that sunk Defiant. Of course, in that case, Marvel could afford to do battle. So we may not see this result in anything. It's just interesting to me, and I wanted to see what others on here thought.

[kjjohanson]

My understanding is that normally licensing agreements stipulate that new concepts created in the stories of licensed characters become the property of the owner, not the licensor, of the IP, but that Shooter had a good relationship with someone from Western that allowed Valiant to put together an agreement with a little more flexibility. My guess is that all of the new concepts created for the licensed characters specifically (Such as "Phil Seleski" or "Dinosaur Hunter") are now bundled with those characters, but entirely new characters (such as Pierce) are the property of VEI. Again, this is just speculation, but it follows what we've seen so far. (In addition to those characters already mentioned, Eternal Warrior first appeared in Solar as well.)

[Tim]

My understanding is that normally licensing agreements stipulate that new concepts created in the stories of licensed characters become the property of the owner, not the licensor, of the IP, but that Shooter had a good relationship with someone from Western that allowed Valiant to put together an agreement with a little more flexibility. My guess is that all of the new concepts created for the licensed characters specifically (Such as "Phil Seleski" or "Dinosaur Hunter") are now bundled with those characters, but entirely new characters (such as Pierce) are the property of VEI. Again, this is just speculation, but it follows what we've seen so far. (In addition to those characters already mentioned, Eternal Warrior first appeared in Solar as well.)

I think Layton is full of sh!t. If my understanding of intellectual property rights is correct (and it's probably not...lol) VEI has rights to any VH1 original characters. They own the rights to the name and appearance of Erica Pierce, but obviously can't use Solar in her origin.

[bamaphilosopher]

My understanding is that normally licensing agreements stipulate that new concepts created in the stories of licensed characters become the property of the owner, not the licensor, of the IP, but that Shooter had a good relationship with someone from Western that allowed Valiant to put together an agreement with a little more flexibility. My guess is that all of the new concepts created for the licensed characters specifically (Such as "Phil Seleski" or "Dinosaur Hunter") are now bundled with those characters, but entirely new characters (such as Pierce) are the property of VEI. Again, this is just speculation, but it follows what we've seen so far. (In addition to those characters already mentioned, Eternal Warrior first appeared in Solar as well.)

That sounds reasonable, since Shooter probably knew he would be introducing new concepts in the books.

Good point about Eternal Warrior, which also appeared first in Solar.

For that matter, so did the Geomancer, and Valiant has used that character (Kay rather than Geoff) in Archer and Armstrong.

I bet you're right that Phil Seleski probably got bundled with Solar. That makes sense to me. In any case, there's no reason VEI would care about him anyway, other than maybe using him in an Erica Pierce story as a nod to the fans, but they obviously wouldn't need him, really, so I think the point is moot. I still wonder if Dynamite is using the name Phil Seleski for Solar. I guess VEI doesn't care if they do, but I'm curious where that will go.

[bamaphilosopher]

My understanding is that normally licensing agreements stipulate that new concepts created in the stories of licensed characters become the property of the owner, not the licensor, of the IP, but that Shooter had a good relationship with someone from Western that allowed Valiant to put together an agreement with a little more flexibility. My guess is that all of the new concepts created for the licensed characters specifically (Such as "Phil Seleski" or "Dinosaur Hunter") are now bundled with those characters, but entirely new characters (such as Pierce) are the property of VEI. Again, this is just speculation, but it follows what we've seen so far. (In addition to those characters already mentioned, Eternal Warrior first appeared in Solar as well.)

I think Layton is full of sh!t. If my understanding of intellectual property rights is correct (and it's probably not...lol) VEI has rights to any VH1 original characters. They own the rights to the name and appearance of Erica Pierce, but obviously can't use Solar in her origin.

I agree with you. I don't think Layton knows the reality of the situation, UNLESS he was JUST talking about the Phil Seleski name. Because obviously Rai, Eternal Warrior, Geomancer, Harada, and several other characters that VEI uses first appeared in Magnus or Solar.

Your point about Erica Pierce is interesting. I wonder if they can use a nuclear accident in her origin story, or if they would have to come up with something else, to avoid a legal challenge? Heretofore I have just assumed as long as they leave Solar or Phil Seleski out they'd be fine, but that might not be the case. I don't know. In any event, VEI has done some nice alternate takes on characters, I'm sure they'd come up with an interesting new angle for her, anyway.

Slightly related to this: I was trying to do that in a Kindle story involving Erica Pierce, until I found out they only want to use for Kindle Worlds characters VEI has specifically published, leaving VH1 off the table. They informed me Erica Pierce was not eligible, nor even a character similar to her. But, of course, I think that's just the Kindle Worlds policy, which leaves Otherman, the Visitor, and other characters I'd love to use off the table too, until VEI uses the character specifically. But they told me I could use any character VEI has used (i.e., I could put Archer and Armstrong in a Unity or XO story, etc.).