Game Kata: Batman Forever


When I started on this Innernet shet, I was under the understanding that, whatever I could come up with, somebody had probably already done it, but harder and faster than me, you know? I mean,  you got thousands of people out there obsessing over the same stuff as you: invariably somebody's bound to have had the same idea.

That's why this blog is focused on obscure stuff and not spur of the moment "Disney just announce SOMETHING" type news regurgitation. You can't out-Io9 Io9, you know?

But I guess I was wrong. You see, I am doing research on fighitng game special moves for a project. The project is a fighting game and the research is ripping off  every cool special move out there.

So naturally I set out to look for compilations of special moves. I mean, surely there has to be a lot of those.

Except there aren't. There's  quite a bit hyper or super move compilations for the games that do have those, sometimes confusingly calling those special moves, because I don't know.

I want to look at Shaq Fu's and Time Killer's special moves without, you know, playing those awful games. That so hard?

And so, Batzarro brings YOU...Game Kata. Where I show you all the special moves in a fighting game. For research and archival purposes.

In our first episode...not a fighting game. Batman Forever certainly felt like a fighting game, specifically Mortal Kombat. However, there IS  a training/vs mode that let's players duke it out not only as Batman and Robin, but also as most enemies from the game. I want to thank Vortexspin for putting the guide online, although some of the moves were wrong and others were missing. Be sure to let me know about how I "forgot" about them and playing as Sugar, too. I also "forgot" about Riddler, be sure to let me know! How forgetful I can be.

As for Batman and Robin, their video will be separate. They had their pick of gadgets, which were used with special move motions.  I probably need a whole video just to trying out the different gatgets.

So when it comes to ripping off moves, I think Riddler Thug's delayed acid drip and Thug 2's spikes version are pretty original and interesting, and seem good to set up a trap for a player.  And RThug's black hole attack seems pretty neat, although in this game it doesn't seem to be as deadly as it could be.

On the other end of things Spice's flying kick is damn near useless because of collission issues, and an opponent would need to be damn well stationary to get hit by it. Thug 1's pin move probably can't help if you aren't playing co-op.

The idea of 2 Face having different moves depending on which side he's facing seems interesting. But the moves are so dissimilar that it's more confusing than anything.  And the way Thug 1 uses  a chainsaw as a motorcycle and a gun is only slightly less hilarious than the way he uses it to castrate his opponent.

Overall, this mode of play in this game is an interesting addition, as the adventure parts of the game are pretty terrible. However, it is not fleshed out enough, and such an afterthought that it's practically hidden from players. Player 1 can't play as Robin or Sugar, and similarly P2 can't play as Batman or Spice. If it had been treated as a fully fledged multiplayer vs mode, and not as training  for the awful single player experience, it might me more noteworthy. These guys obviously wanted to make a fighting game, I don't see why didn't just do that, instead of making a half-hearted precursor to Mortal Kombat Mythologies.

Scooby Doo is back. Scooby Doo never left.

Let's see if I get this right. Robin-Velma plays videogames, Robo Scooby speaks through Emoticons, Daphne looks like a Gen 13 Reject, Fred is trying to be an Extreme Ghostbuster, and Shaggy looks like that weird guy that performs at the park. Did I get all of them?

Scooby Dooby Doo? Where are you? They're putting you on DC.
It really really looks like they filtered you, through some bad DBZ.

There's no time to fear, this fiscal year, you really must deliver
Profits to stock holders who own you now, or I have to sell my liver!

So, after a long time, WB has finally decided to revive obscure Hanna Barbera cartoons it owns as DC comics. For the most part it looks ok and I can't complain, because I kind of asked them to do it. But then there's the Scooby Doo comic.
If you asked me to make a parody of what Scooby Doo as made by DC would be like, this is exactly what I would think off. Daphne holding a gun? Scooby with Vegeta's Scouter. Shaggy a weirdo? Tats on Freddy? Velma looking like she's almost got a domino mask on?

But to be frank I always found  Scooby's appeal to be kind of meh. I'm not saying I thought it was bad or anything. It's ok. But okay enough for there to be so much of it? I fought for staying at home if it meant missing Taz-Mania and Ninja Turtles, but Scooby Doo, I just didn't care.

I mean either of the Scooby Doos. When I was a kid we had A Pup Named Scooby Doo, and Reruns of the original 60's  show.

Which brings me to ask. What's with constantly reviving Scooby Doo. I mean, last year I made a chart about this. Look.

 These are the years doring which new Scooby Doo Television shows have been on the air. The longest Scooby has been of the air has been the 10 year gap after the end of APNSC and What's New Scooby Doo(I think. I did that research last year). All to basically the same plot. There's a "Scary" thing, and some kids investigate it like they're getting payed for it. But then it's now. It wasn't something supernatural. Just an asshole in a mask.

Compare this to say, Batman, the most popular Super Hero in the world.


This are the years on which Batman has been on the air. There's a 15 year Gap during which Batman hasn't been on TV sets, and part of those years are following WB's purchase of it. That means there must have been a couple of years of thos guys just going "howda we make moneys off of this Batman stuf we own now?"

The ammount of years with no Ninja Turtles, though, will amaze you.

 Sure it's existed a shorter amount of time than either of the others, but TMNT already has  2 Movie Reboots, 3 cartoon seriei and a a live action show. 

But back to Scooby Doo. I don't know who gritty 90's Scooby Doo is for. I mean, it could be good or whatever, but for something THIS different from a franchise  that's already done some good reinventions, and yet is mostly known for basically a single plot, it's kind of a weird move. Don't get eaten out there, Velma.

Horrendous Theory: Frank Miller Makes-A-Wish

Say, over the years Frank Miller has had a bit of a falling out with the nerdosphear. While highly celebrated during the 80's for his comics about Batman being gritty, as well as other Sin City and 300, the pervasive thought hanging in the air seems to be that Frank's become a parody of himself, as well a mysoginist warmonger, with a smaller minority that thinks that he was ALWAYS a mysoginist warmonger and that we just kinda realized it.

But whatever you think of him, you have to admit his projects have drawn a lot of controversy in the last decade, whether it's that book about Batman(later removing the Batman part) going to the Middle East to kill Bin Laden, which took so long to make US forces got to him first, or making an actual Batman book with a title alluding to Nazi terminology.

Now why would DC allow for Frank Miller to make this kinds of things with it's bread and butter character? You might think that the guys who okayed Sue Dibney's rape and Green Lantern having a book titled "Triumph of the Will" maybe aren't so good at drawing the lines between envelope pushing and going to far to get your book mentioned. But I have another theory.

This is a picture of  Frank Miller, looking not-so-hot at age (58). Lots of rumors have circulated about why he looks so beat up, but what never came up is "he's super healthy."

Without speculating about a man's health, I think Frank Miller's been given a final diagonosis. He's got a date with death coming up real soon.

So you're DC, and one of your former star talents is dying and you know it. And he approaches you and tells you he wants to make a book in which Batman kills cops and makes Robin eat rats. Now, this is your main breadwinner character, and if anyone else where to approach with that idea, you'd turn him down. But are you really gonna send a good friend of the industry, a guy you might have read up as a young man, to die of sick and in poverty? No, you let him do whatever he wants.

It just so happens his Make-A-Wish wish is less of the happy puppy variety and more of the whatever this is variety.

But my SUB theory of this is that there is no empathy involved in the process. I mean, when Frank Miller dies, the hate will subside, and up will float a body of work that people will have a burst of interest in, if only to know it the troubled old man really was a madman or a genius or both.

So instead of playing it safe and telling him no, you double down and let Frank Miller make mincemeat out of popular characters, knowing that it's an INVESTMENT for a book that, if it doesn't sell NOW, will surely sell a lot once Frank Miller kicks the bucket. If it's the first thing it's heart warming, but if it's the second thing it's kind of diabolically genious.

But it's probably none of those. I mean, I'm not Frank Miller's doctor or anything.  I just think both of those things  make more sense than someone seeing the term "Batman: The Master Race" and not seeing any problem with it. But hey we'll see.

Adam Ruins Everything says it better than me

Sometimes you can't say it better than it's already been said. So in an effort to educate my readers regarding copyright, I'm delegating the task to Adam, of Ruining Everything fame, to put into voice what I've been trying to say in text for a while. Please, check him out at TruTv's channel, and  tell him BGE sent you.

The REAL reason Gamestop left Puerto Rico

"Power(off) to the Players"

So as you may have heard, Gamestop has decided to close all 7 of it's stores in Puerto Rico and GTFO. As a Puerto Rican living in Puerto Rico I can explain it slightly better than IGN, but it'll take me a bit of time because the story of Gamestop leaving the island is also basically the story of the of the island itself.

So in the  late 1890s the Americans took the island from Spain after 400 years of spanish rule during the Spanish American War.  We could talk a long time about this and why it happened or if it was right, but ultimately that has nothing to do with Games.

After a few decades of military rule, it started to look a little bad. So they made the Island a Free Associated State, which since it's not a colony, forever solved all status disputes with the US forever(citation needed) . Now we were all American Citizens, but the island had only words to represent it on congress and no vote. Congress also reserves the right to undo any laws we try to do.

Financially, the island started to progress because several laws made it a good place for the manufacture buisneess. Cities were built,  and people started achieving enough capital to spend on frivolous stuff, like  TVs and Games.

However, eventually, the laws that made manufacture a good buisness were taken away, and slowly but surely the backbone of our economy started to fall under us.

This was the point to find a NEW backbone to our economy. But our leaders had a different idea: Borrow a lot of money and pretend we were ok. They Weekend at Bernies-ed our Economy. After all, would a collapsing economy have an expensive train that runs  a short distance? An expensive obelisk praising the chief of police? Giant metal avocados?
Our leaders suck. Can you tell?

The thing with borrowed money is, you have to pay it back or else people won't want to lend you more. Soon the size of our debt was mirrored only by our lack of resources to pay it back. And so, our government looked to the only reasonable source of income it could: giant corporations that owed it billions of dollars and had operated for years without paying them The informal economy,

The informal economy is mostly  criminals who sell drugs and guns, but don't  pay any taxes on those because...they aren't doing this to pay government. However, it also includes, say, people selling water bottles on the street, who aren't paying taxes on them because...fuck the government.

So they made a tax on bought goods of 7%. So if you buy a pack of waters to sell on Walgreens, or a Kawasaki bike with which to shoot up your drug rivals, you pay the cost of that, and a 7% tax charge on that.

The only thing they forgot was that they suck at doing their job. Oh, a cop would fucking threaten you with thousands of dollars in fines if you sold water on the corner now, but although most buisnesses charged this new tax, the government had no system in place to see if buisnesses were actually giving them the REAL 7% of anything. Many places did charge the tax, then proceeded to pocket the money.

With the noose tightening around their neck, the government came up with new incremental taxes on the chain of production itself, figuring if it could tax stuff at every point of retail, it would make  a lot of money.

Instead that, along with the continual increases on the cost of water and electricity, are killing the very idea of malls. You see, the owners of a mall charge  the stores within it, and that's how they make their money. Stores like KMart and Gamestop are mall stores. There aren't loose Kmarts and Gamestops around.  So, with imported goods taxed several times over before they hit the shelf, Malls refusing to back down on their rental prices, and frankly the economy being in the shitter because...there ISN'T an economy,  stores like Gamestop can't find any ground anymore.

While it's not quite a good thing that Gamestop is going away, I want to see the positive side of it. It's certainly good for Neo Japan. It's a small place, near my home. I've been meaning to go there, but now, I won't have choice it I want to get my game on.

I will miss Gamestop, and it's used games, and used games  sold in new boxes for new game prices, and the way they gave you 25 cents of discount if you brought them a used game from 2 years ago, I think we will  survive.  We somehow always will. This is hustler island.

BGE investigates: Do we have too MUCH Batman?


In my nerd commandments article I commented that, while Batman movies have been recycling a lot of it's villains and  snubbing others for over 2 decades, I have no desire for Batman to go away.

 But that got me to thinking, maybe Batman COULD go away for a bit.

You see, since he was created that silly 60's TV show, Batman has become overall the most popular super hero in the world. This has various reasons. Unlike Green Lantern and Flash, or even X-Men, bringing the the concept to the screen isn't filled with technical obstacles. And trust me, if it was by the comics alone, Batman would be stuck in the same level of recognition as Rotor the Walrus. No, I'm not giving you a hyperlink.  Batman, and overall most of his enemies, are mostly humans, and don't have require a lot of complicated effects to be realized with a modicum of acceptability.

Just like vampires, and zombies Batman's ease of presentation has allowed other sides of the character to flourish. But it's not just that. Even as many heroes' run ups with the grim and grittiness of the 80's and 90's has  become a mocking point for them, Batman's has endured as the POSITIVE point in the character's history, despite the fact that it could get about as silly as anything else.

When's the last time you saw DLC based 50 year old TV show outside of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare's Bewitched Costume pack?
But maybe it's a generational thing. I'm 30 and Batman has been  the most popular character in several mediums for the better part of most of my life. But even growning up during a phenomena called Batmania, I've never seen Batman be this prevalent. Batman's 3rd  official live action movie continuity starts with Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice next year. It itself is a prequel to 2 Justice League movies which, if you think they're gonna put aside the most popular character in the world being played by  Holywood's beloved Ben Affleck to focus on anyone else, you are sorely mistaken.
Ben Affleck  as Bruce Wayne looks like Ben Affleck a whole lot.
There's a Batman Solo movie already planned with Affleck set to direct and obviously star.  Suicide Squad will feature a cameo with him, and also spotlight on the ever popular Joker villain, with additional Batman villains like Harley Queen, Killer Croc, and Deadshot(played by Hollywood's beloved Will Smith, and you know what a scene hog he can be) making  significant percentage of the titular team.

But if that's all too grim for you, there's also Lego Batman, but like for cinema, not like the handful that exist out of cinema. And not like the Lego Batman GAME series. And speaking of games, Batman also has a game series to him now: The Arkham Series. That one has been a big success so far, so count on more coming. For the record, during my day we never had a Batman game series, especially not one hailed as worthy of magazine cover importance. In fact, we had a running joke about how the assortment of unconnected Batman games could never be any good.
And let's not forget the Batman car game! Remember, Batman doesn't use guns!
And let's not forget Gotham, a Smallville-esque attempt of filling the years between Batman's parents being murdered and Batman becoming Batman with a long running soap a dope. Oh, and animated movies coming out about pretty much most important Batman comics arcs.

For a long time, I wanted DC to finally give us heroes that wern't Batman. And while that call is seemingly being answered, It seems to me that they wouldn't take "the risk" unless they could pillow any potential  losses with EVEN MORE BATMAN.

It seems to me at some point we could be reaching Peak Batman, a point of Bat Exhaustion when Batman is become so common place, so ever present, that really he becomes boring. This is even more dangerous than Batman becoming ridiculous. Batman has bounced back from ridiculous a few times.  But once the people become bored with the character, nothing but leaving it alone can help.
The 7 years between this and Batman Begins where spent, yes, trying to make more Batman.

Remember, there was a time where Archie outsold Batman. Yes, that Archie. He had cartoons and stuff. He didn't need Predator or death and gay stunts. It was just a simple funny book, in every sense.  But over time, Archie's brand of humor became a bit bland for American audiences. Archie became boring.  Where are Archie's movie and cartoon deals? Where are Archie's games? They aren't.

It is my opinion that WB should put a leash on the Bat, but nevertheless I suspect they won't.  If the Batman brand crashes it may take a few decades before it can bounce back. This would be bad for fans, since it wouldn't just cut short exploitations of the Batverse, but much further DEVELOPMENT of it in it's source material. It would also be bad for WB, since "a few decades" is what it HAS left until Batman enters the public domain. But I guess we'll see.

I can still remember how worn out those gloves where...


6 Things we're missing out on thanks to Copyright

If you hate the idea of public domain, you hatin' on Cthulu

A new year! A chance to think about the future. Specifically, what might have been. You see, I'm a fan of alternate worlds in which things went different. But not just ones where, like, I'm a jerk wearing black. Or, well...MORE of a jerk wearing black a lot more often. But the ones that could have easily been ours. The one where Mr Freeze was played by Patrick Stewart and where Ryu had that fiery kick.

I think of copyright.  Of the  Game Jam I'm currently hosting and part of my impetus is I thought of the things that could have been, should copyright had not been extended to last longer than Stan Lee's actual lifespan. A lot of people where worried about their favorite characters and how they'd be besmirched if copyright  wasn't there to protect them (but I've been to Paheal, and and know that nothing is safe or sacred.). But I can only lament the possibilities that never occurred. This lost opportunities include...

6) Some more celebrity comebacks

You see, some celebrities have the one character or two they're good at. There's only one Charly Chaplin, only one Larry, Curly and Mo, only one Ace Ventura.

But what happens sometimes is, MGM owns Ace Ventura, the character. Jim Carrey totally has a great idea for a sequel. It's awesome. But the studio don't agree with it. They have a full schedule and a head full of farts

Who the hell is this for?

  If Ace could become public domain while Jim Carrey lived, He'd be able to work with another studio, or no studio, and bring back the character.  If the Ghost Busters had become public domain, Dan Akroid would just be able to do his own Ghost Busters spin off or whatever, without having to fight the studio or wait for Bill Murray.

5) Saving movie theaters

Well, I suppose now I'll have to laser pointer my big screen TV while people I know yell obscenities.

When I was a kid, going to the movie Theater to experience a movie was an epic thing that had few substitutes. Indeed, televisions had yet to catch on to theater quality,  bootlegs where not something you could grab off the street and put it in your pocket, or download, and cellphones that record had yet to be invented.

But we can't live in the past anymore. Theater attendance is apparently at an all time low, even though Hollywood has made sure no movies made this year weren't based on a comic, TV Show, cartoon, other movies, or toys. Cinemas  can't afford to fight these other mediums, and they especially can't fight the fact people know the movie will be legally available in a few months.

Really, theaters rent these movies hoping people will buy enough popcorn and candy bars to  offset the cost of the rental, employees, maintenance, and so on and so forth.

However, if   movies that weren't re-registered into the copyright office after 36 years went public domain, then we'd have movies that could be shown with no cost to the audience, we'd have films that could be shown to the audience, free of charge, from as early as the 70s and even the 80's! You could set up your own little theater and show them!

"I've got The Hobbit movie for 7 bucks and...Invasion of the Bee Women for 50 cents."

Mind you, most of the classics wouldn't be available. Mostly the rare movies that  didn't  get registered, usually because they weren't  profitable enough.  But since there is no cost to rent them, you could run low ass prices and get bored people, or retrophiles into it.

And further, the bigger chains could have some movies to run in the lower seasons. They could organize special viewing of this movies.

But as long as copyright owners have their copyright, huh?

4) It would discourage large companies from buying all the cool stuff

The Disneys, Viacoms, and WBs of the world have been busy. In a  few couple of years they've gobbled up most of the popular brands that they already didn't own. Disney bought Star Wars and Marvel. WB(that already owns DC, all the filmation cartoons, all the Hanna Barbera characters, and possibly your firstborn.) bought Mortal Kombat(along with other stuff you don't care about, and they don't, either) while Viacom locked down Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and Power Rangers.

You find the weirdest things when buying  a game company.

Clearly there is good money in owning a perennial hit, and where there is monies, giant corporations  will be. I don't resent them for it, but I don't like the implications of it.

I mean, clearly  WB has more characters than it can use or need. But who cares? The older ones probably still have a lifetime of copyright left.

Back in the day, though, you had to pay every 30 years to keep your work under protected status. Not a lot of money, mind you. But perhaps enough money that maybe they get to thinking if they REALLY need to hold on to the rights of Shmoo and Batfink.

You'd have to be a real dick to think otherwise.

Marvel has 7000+ characters*. I ran some costs and it would cost them 210000 to maintain the copyrights each of those, based on a 30 dollar fee. Some of these characters are simply not worth holding on to, and would go public domain.  Because, seriously, if you can't spend 30 bucks every 30 years in your ploy to put your dick in DC's face, maybe you shouldn't get to do it for free.

Would Disney see things differently about buying Marvel if they knew such copyright exclusivity had a limit? Well, don't make me bring up the Disney filmography again. Those guys love the Public Domain. Of course they'd rather get Spider-Man in the 2030s for free than pay  millions of dollars for him NOW.

3) Hundreds of books, movies, and songs

I join Duke in bringing up all the stuff we could  ALL use, now ( Now, Duke, I've made some assumptions about what you're gonna post several months into the future. Don't give me a dead link, now). A few highlights:


I Put a Spell on You.


The Cat in the Hat Comes Back. Free Cat in the Motherfucking Hat for Everybody!


The Blob, The Fly, and Attack of the 50 Foot woman. The Hidden Fortress, a movie that directly inspired Star Wars, is also from this year.

3)Saving a bunch of your taxpayer money

Nobody likes it the way it is, anyway

"But Batzarro, how is my tax money being spent on copyright?" You may ask. It's simple. For a work to be fully protected, it needs to be registered at the Copyright office. Most of the mainstream shows, movies and songs that got made,  scores of ones that didn't, and even  those sketches of Ninja Turtle clones people registered so no one would steal their "ideas" are all literally, physically registered in actual buildings. How else are we supposed to know whether our sexy, steampunk remake of Narnia will get us a Cease and Desist?

I know. I have a problem.

More recently, of course. You can look up part of these records yourself online. But for certain hard to find ones you'll have to have employees look it up for you. For 200 dollars.

You see, it  used to be copyright did not last as much, and payments where made to ensure those works remain protected. The copyright office had a little more cash to operate, and works actually lapsed into the public domain.

But  now, your initial payment of 40 something dollars gets you twice as many years of protection. It costs money to keep all those bad ideas protected, so it gotta come out of YOUR pockets.

It costs the government as of 2002  13 million a year to maintain a copyright record. Or rather, it costs YOU that much. The Copyright Office is not a private entity. It's a subsidiary of the United States Government. This why permanent copyright is impossible: We don't have enough money to keep those kinds of records in, say 1000 years. Even with user fees, no way the cost of keeping those unmade Batman movies protected won't keep adding up.

2) Adam Strange's appearance in Smash Bros

That's right. Adam Strange, the Superhero who lives on another planet until a thunder forces him back on Earth(or does he live on earth until a thunder forces him back to another planet), could have been in Smash Bros in 2015 as DLC. Sure,in that scenario Batman and Superman are both long into the Public Domain, But Adam's practically made for it!

Sure, why not.

Nintendo wouldn't put Sherlock Holmes in Smash Bros. Really, most of the characters on public domain now are from  before color movies.  Back then we didn' have concepts like "Superheroes" or "Other Planets" or "Time Travel". That means that, most time travelers, extraterrestrials, and Superheroes are copyrighted.

You might think it's cheesy to want to use the characters made by  someone else. After all, why can't I come up with own character? What  am I, a hack?

Haha, you wouldn't tell Alan Moore, that. Really, when he's not using public domain characters to do artsy perversion he's nudge-winkingly trying to use James Bond and Harry Potter in his stories. Why, if he could use the genuine article, I bet you it'd be mother buggering fantastic, and none of you at the peanut gallery peasants would be calling him lazy.

But seriously, this is borderline fan ficky, Alan.

Why can't Chris Sims, self declared Batmanologist, have a stab at Batman? Bob Kane and Bill Finger is dead, and WB is in no risk of going chapter 11, over a webcomic. Why must we wait so many years for a Wonder Woman movie? Because the creative possibilities are chained  to profit margins.

1) Not as many remakes

"Whooooot? How can making very popular works public domain make there be less remakes?" That's a good question. I mean, it SOUNDS counter intuitive. If Batman where public domain, if feels like he'd be in every movie this year.

But actually, no. You see, studios like this thing where they are the sole owners of a franchise that's worth millions of dollars. They get to make exactly as many Superman movies as they want, and you get to do exactly as many Superman movies as they'll allow(zero). And then they get to do it again next decade.

But if they only had 30 years, it's put pressure on them to create/buy/own a NEW thing for 30 years.  Once anyone can make their own Superman movie,  WB will probably move on to buying the next thing they feel will last those 30 years, and not "whatever, it's forever"

What's more, new, obscure stuff is essentially new works to you if you don't know them. Have you seen Star Oddyssey? No? Then maybe my book based on it will be new to you! I mean, the problem is not that it's a remake. Didn't you like The Fly? Well maybe my book is Cronenberg's Fly to the original movie's The Fly.

Brundelfly would approve of my book.
My point is why won't you fuckers buy my fucking book obviously there's a lot more stories to tell out there than how Peter Parker got his powers. If more studios had more legal access to a wider variety of popular stories, those studios would be less likely to keep pumping the same stories they already pumped. I mean, let's look at the 1958 box office: and compare it to the 2013 box office. Which has more remakes, reboots or adaptations? So really, we should be fighting for more stuff to lapse into the public domain, not less.

Ignore the fact all but one of 1958's movies are based on books. Books don't count.
We're undercutting the creativity of the entire country because what? Because "I might just make a great work, and I don't want to eventually have people enjoy it without their joy profiting me directly?" Let's fight for shorter copyright durations today, before we have to fight for less long copyright durations tomorrow.

*In my zealousness, though, I completely forgot that you don't exactly register A CHARACTER in  copyright, but a work. A character's first appearance being PD makes THAT first appearance of the character Public Domain(because you can't make derivatives of a public domain second issue, which would be based on the first issue). Which means, that Marvel would probably have to copyright and re-register EACH COMIC IT MAKES to make sure no elements in it ever lapse. Now, being that Marvel has made approximately (we're not gonna discount licensed material, variant covers and crossover shit. Math is bad enough, and I won't be surprised when I turn out to have completely bungled up this, anyway.)32,000 comics, we're talking roughly  $960000 every 30 years.  The original math still works if Marvel was  just  registering first appearances to keep the first appearance from lapsing, discounting joint first appearances, obviously. It's still a lot of money to keep the rights to The Hypno-Hustler and Venom's Ex-Wife, though.

Follow by Email

There was an error in this gadget

What are you guys watching?