My biggest takeaway from this episode: Most artists/creative people/freelancers would be thrilled to receive a 20 grand check in the mail, with the promise that more irregular 'love checks' would follow. Neil, however, thinks like a business man. He would prefer to have something in writing that grants him regular royalties on a consistent basis, even if the payments are smaller. $20,000 is nice, but you can't retire on that. He's thinking about his future, like a businessman. Smart lesson for all of us creative types out there. Great episode!
Draw a line between artist-creator and on the other side of it put "businessman" is just deeply, pure and raw stupidity. Which brings like this one and more.
After listening to this latest installment, I am starting to have questions about how Image Comics, in general, was organized financially. Were all the Image founders working without any kind of contracts (I imagine they were) or paperwork of any kind as to how revenue generated from comic sales, toys, etc. were to be distributed? I believe that the reason Todd was hesitant to draw up contracts with outside creators (like Gaiman) is because he wanted the freedom to allocate revenue back into Image comics, toy development, etc. as he saw fit. I don't think he was just pocketing all of it. It sounds like there was this agreement between the founders that Image was just one big sandbox ("you can use my characters and I can use yours for crossovers") and I wonder what the understanding was about how much of comic sales went back to a creator/founder and how much went back to the Image company to keep it running. I also don't think Todd was completely oblivious to what a standard DC or Marvel contract would contain.
Maybe understandable that the paperwork wasn't in order in 1992, but in 1996 when Todd was also running a successful toy company it definitely shifty that he was still doing love checks and trying to glad hand people instead of having standardized contracts and accounting practices-then again bad business practices can linger forever if no one says anything.
I heard about this channel from Daniel Warren Johnson (writer and artist). He is one of the few great and innovative creators working in comics right now. He has stated on a few different occasions that he would like to be on the show. Please have him on!
Thanks guys for doing this series -- it's been insightful and fun. I had most of the first 50 issues of Spawn as a kid and issue 9 was my favorite. I also remember buying the Angela and Medieval Spawn toys from my local drug store. I stopped reading spawn after about issue 50, but I remember buying issue 100 from Border's Books and Music. That was the issue Angela was killed off.
This is fascinating stuff. Todd is as dodgy has heck. I'm guessing he didn't want to pay lawyers and accountants like a reputable business owner, and hoped that 'love' cheques would keep people quiet.
Been watching the channel since it began. I’ve wanted you’ll to cover this so much I actually considered putting together a Steele Dossier for your mail bag on the 2nd trial. Don’t believe I ever saw the transcripts from the 1st case so this is very enlightening. You right Ed each character is a pawn here but when Gaiman wins this 1st case all the characters level up to King and Queen status. Then with the 2nd case McFarlane’s lawyer is prevented from being able to treat Medieval Spawn as a derivative character anymore. He at that point is treated like a fully original character. As such they can’t argue Dark Ages Spawn is just derivative of Spawn. I saw it as starting a domino effect which had they not settled could of lead to Gaiman winning future rights to all the other Spawn’s released in the Dark Ages toy line too (Ninja Spawn, Raven Spawn, etc). With Angela, Gaiman was than able to cite the other angels created without Gaiman as all being derivative of her. So he kind of gets it both ways in his favorite. Medieval is not derivative but Dark Ages and Tiffany, and the 330,000 angels are.
Also I think McFarlane was blown away by just how “good” DC was treating Gaiman in comparison to his Marvel contract. Seemed to me like Gaiman had the best deal ever in comics at DC. What I’ve always been confused at too is how they would figure out the figures when it’s a cameo in 1 episode or an Easter egg in the movie? The contact seems like it’s saying 15% net profit for any type of appearance, which seems very high for those kind of appearances. Does each characters used gain an additional 15%? If Angela is on 20 of 150 trading cards does he get 15% of the total sales or just from the 20 cards? Spoiler Alert!!!…… When Gaiman wins it’s becomes not 15% but 50%!!!
McFarlane should have made clear the inner company deal the Image partners had with each other to be able to use each other characters as that does put them both in an awkward spot. When Gaiman won the rights to angels he didn’t help create (besides writing there were 330,000 of them in the trade) Capullo wrote, “Where’s my slice of the pie.” I’ve also seen Capullo mention that the checks can very a lot.
It was very interesting hearing just how much McFarlane didn’t have planned with the book. Based on what I found from Erik Larson talking about it I had assumed McFarlane had indeed planned to have Angels in the book. He said he warned McFarlane not to hirer a quest writer for the issue that introduces Heaven into the mix. This was from the time Larson was helping to create the 2nd Creators Bill of Rights with Dave Sims in response to this lawsuit.
Not sure if it will be mentioned in the 1st suit but in the 2nd it’s revealed McFarlane didn’t have the copyright lingo right for that 1st year. All it said was Spawn’s name and logo where TM but it didn’t have the wording that all characters were copyrighted. Also in the 2nd Gaiman won a writers credit to be listed on issue 26. He wrote the 3 pages with Gabrielle talking to Spawn. Gaiman was payed 3,000 for the 3 pages and 30,000 for the mini. Much lower than the single issue 9 as I’m guessing he was coming to McFarlane instead of the other way around. So funny that his kid was like write something I’ll like. HaHa
Also this seems to have changed how he decided to credited Moore with issue 37 too. Originally it said The Freak dialog by Moore with McFarlane writing the issue. I saw a digital version that had Moore listed by himself now. Now imagine given Gaiman’s testimony of all that Moore created for McFarlane if he decided to sue too, what would not be in the Spawn comic anymore? Moore set up Hell, all of Violator’s brothers, their dad, Malebolgia’s name, and the suit being a creature of Hell.
Excellent video, guys! Lessons learned for future generations ! Love checks? LOL! Wow! Whatta circle jerk! F n lawyers/liars! I’ve been on jury duty twice and those gd suit monkeys can milk the clock! As always I find your variety of videos very interesting! Fn lawyers! Thanks again!
This is very interesting. It's nice to know that even the mighty Neil Gaiman needs to take the occasional "Bio-Break"! I all seriousness, this is cool shit!
I bet the reason he never had a contract is because McFarlane wasn't familiar with paying royalties...isnt that the reason he (and they Image founders) left Marvel?
Man I would want @legaleagle check this out. But yeha, lawyers playing dumb and trying to trip Neil up. And I think Todd meant gell treat better then marvel no DC. Turns out maybe DC was treating Neil better then image and marvel
Love check seems like the weirdest and sketches thing. It's also crazy someone can throw around $120k without a contract. Man, it is almost another world listening to story from the early '90s in comics. I won't lie, I was more in Tod's camp at the beginning since as a fan Angela is now randomly in the Marvel universe? You two talked about the top of their craft but waited this long to get down to nuts and bolts? This business is insane. Looking forward to more of these vids but less of the lawyers debating which contract is which...UGH.
Do you guys think Todd worked himself into a shoot by even hiring high end writers in the first place? The shallow books written by Todd were selling anyway.
I guess the bottom line is he should of had contracts. Erik Larson said he warned McFarlane about having a guest writer for the introduction to Heaven in his comic about Spawn being stuck in the middle of both sides. However in his testimony Gaiman makes it sound like McFarlane didn’t even have the idea of angels being involved. I’m sure in issue 4 at least the idea of Hell being at war was mentioned. So I also assumed it inevitable that angels would appear at some point.
In response to this case Dave Sims has said that if Gaiman did not wish to give McFarlane anything to be able to use in future issues he could of written a one off like he and Miller did. Instead it seems like Moore and Gaiman used their 2 issues to add a ton to the mythos of Spawn. I would argue Moore added more elements that McFarlane was able to use throughout. Whereas Gaiman’s contribution actually hindered where McFarlane could take the story. Series is almost 325 issues long and only a handful give a peek at the other side of the war.
Can’t wait for them to cover the 2nd case because all of Gaiman’s testimony there seemed to go against his case to me. He made sure to let the female judge know that had he created the visuals for Angela she would not of been depicted so bare skinned with little armor covering her body. Yet he then is suing for the other angels being depicted as having a similar look and style to them. In other words suing McFarlane for Capullo’s angels looking too much like McFarlane’s own style. After both cases anyone in the world minus McFarlane could make a book about female Valkyrie style warrior angels and not get sued. Only he can as the 2nd case is based mainly on his art style in regards to the angels.
Now I want to hear a cover of the B-52s song "Love Shack" called "Love Checks". LOVE CHECKS BABY!
Explaining to lawyers the ins and outs of spin off titles and mini series and how characters evolve is pure gold, 😂
This has become the best way to start the week. Thanks boys!
I'm glad Mick Anglo had the rights all along to Miracle Man. RIP Mick
My biggest takeaway from this episode: Most artists/creative people/freelancers would be thrilled to receive a 20 grand check in the mail, with the promise that more irregular 'love checks' would follow. Neil, however, thinks like a business man. He would prefer to have something in writing that grants him regular royalties on a consistent basis, even if the payments are smaller. $20,000 is nice, but you can't retire on that. He's thinking about his future, like a businessman. Smart lesson for all of us creative types out there. Great episode!
Draw a line between artist-creator and on the other side of it put "businessman" is just deeply, pure and raw stupidity. Which brings like this one and more.
Can't believe I've been sleeping on this procedural drama...
Final thoughts: Image worked exactly like Deviant Art but with extra steps
After listening to this latest installment, I am starting to have questions about how Image Comics, in general, was organized financially. Were all the Image founders working without any kind of contracts (I imagine they were) or paperwork of any kind as to how revenue generated from comic sales, toys, etc. were to be distributed? I believe that the reason Todd was hesitant to draw up contracts with outside creators (like Gaiman) is because he wanted the freedom to allocate revenue back into Image comics, toy development, etc. as he saw fit. I don't think he was just pocketing all of it. It sounds like there was this agreement between the founders that Image was just one big sandbox ("you can use my characters and I can use yours for crossovers") and I wonder what the understanding was about how much of comic sales went back to a creator/founder and how much went back to the Image company to keep it running. I also don't think Todd was completely oblivious to what a standard DC or Marvel contract would contain.
I think there were two separate contracts, one for Image and another for MacFarlane tonys
Todd songs like marvel type
Maybe understandable that the paperwork wasn't in order in 1992, but in 1996 when Todd was also running a successful toy company it definitely shifty that he was still doing love checks and trying to glad hand people instead of having standardized contracts and accounting practices-then again bad business practices can linger forever if no one says anything.
I hope you get Neil Gaiman
If this turns into its own show/channel, I'm in.
I heard about this channel from Daniel Warren Johnson (writer and artist). He is one of the few great and innovative creators working in comics right now.
He has stated on a few different occasions that he would like to be on the show. Please have him on!
Heck yes, Peter Chung and more Kayfabe Law all in one day...yes please!
We’re getting more into this now, it’s getting exciting haha, this was my favourite one yet.
I can hear in Todd's voice: Love Checks, the kids will love it!
My new favorite segment!!
Now the b52's love Schack will forever be love checks!
Thanks guys for doing this series -- it's been insightful and fun.
I had most of the first 50 issues of Spawn as a kid and issue 9 was my favorite. I also remember buying the Angela and Medieval Spawn toys from my local drug store.
I stopped reading spawn after about issue 50, but I remember buying issue 100 from Border's Books and Music. That was the issue Angela was killed off.
If I could 'like' this video 100 times over, I would.
Loving this series.
This is fascinating stuff. Todd is as dodgy has heck. I'm guessing he didn't want to pay lawyers and accountants like a reputable business owner, and hoped that 'love' cheques would keep people quiet.
Wonder do the IRS has. Special section for Todd the love cheques tax and working out to apply to tax payments.
You struck gold with this series guys! So good!
you guys are really good at this!
I could sure use a love check or two.
Been watching the channel since it began. I’ve wanted you’ll to cover this so much I actually considered putting together a Steele Dossier for your mail bag on the 2nd trial. Don’t believe I ever saw the transcripts from the 1st case so this is very enlightening. You right Ed each character is a pawn here but when Gaiman wins this 1st case all the characters level up to King and Queen status. Then with the 2nd case McFarlane’s lawyer is prevented from being able to treat Medieval Spawn as a derivative character anymore. He at that point is treated like a fully original character. As such they can’t argue Dark Ages Spawn is just derivative of Spawn. I saw it as starting a domino effect which had they not settled could of lead to Gaiman winning future rights to all the other Spawn’s released in the Dark Ages toy line too (Ninja Spawn, Raven Spawn, etc). With Angela, Gaiman was than able to cite the other angels created without Gaiman as all being derivative of her. So he kind of gets it both ways in his favorite. Medieval is not derivative but Dark Ages and Tiffany, and the 330,000 angels are.
Also I think McFarlane was blown away by just how “good” DC was treating Gaiman in comparison to his Marvel contract. Seemed to me like Gaiman had the best deal ever in comics at DC. What I’ve always been confused at too is how they would figure out the figures when it’s a cameo in 1 episode or an Easter egg in the movie? The contact seems like it’s saying 15% net profit for any type of appearance, which seems very high for those kind of appearances. Does each characters used gain an additional 15%? If Angela is on 20 of 150 trading cards does he get 15% of the total sales or just from the 20 cards? Spoiler Alert!!!…… When Gaiman wins it’s becomes not 15% but 50%!!!
McFarlane should have made clear the inner company deal the Image partners had with each other to be able to use each other characters as that does put them both in an awkward spot. When Gaiman won the rights to angels he didn’t help create (besides writing there were 330,000 of them in the trade) Capullo wrote, “Where’s my slice of the pie.” I’ve also seen Capullo mention that the checks can very a lot.
It was very interesting hearing just how much McFarlane didn’t have planned with the book. Based on what I found from Erik Larson talking about it I had assumed McFarlane had indeed planned to have Angels in the book. He said he warned McFarlane not to hirer a quest writer for the issue that introduces Heaven into the mix. This was from the time Larson was helping to create the 2nd Creators Bill of Rights with Dave Sims in response to this lawsuit.
Not sure if it will be mentioned in the 1st suit but in the 2nd it’s revealed McFarlane didn’t have the copyright lingo right for that 1st year. All it said was Spawn’s name and logo where TM but it didn’t have the wording that all characters were copyrighted. Also in the 2nd Gaiman won a writers credit to be listed on issue 26. He wrote the 3 pages with Gabrielle talking to Spawn. Gaiman was payed 3,000 for the 3 pages and 30,000 for the mini. Much lower than the single issue 9 as I’m guessing he was coming to McFarlane instead of the other way around. So funny that his kid was like write something I’ll like. HaHa
Also this seems to have changed how he decided to credited Moore with issue 37 too. Originally it said The Freak dialog by Moore with McFarlane writing the issue. I saw a digital version that had Moore listed by himself now. Now imagine given Gaiman’s testimony of all that Moore created for McFarlane if he decided to sue too, what would not be in the Spawn comic anymore? Moore set up Hell, all of Violator’s brothers, their dad, Malebolgia’s name, and the suit being a creature of Hell.
Great series guys!
these lawyers are a lot more cordial than im used to
Mcfarlane ends up looking like a total sleaze ball in this episode
I thoroughly enjoy these
As someone with a Sandman Death tattoo and in the legal profession this entire series is great.
I'm am LOVING these.
Hey! Much better than Depp vs. Heard!
Ed:Neal Gaiman just took a wiz.
Me: spitting my drink out my nose.
You guys are so entertaining. Keep up the good work 😃
Awesome,this is what we live for .
'Love Checks'
Everyone except Todd: wha.....?!?!?
I love these, riveting!!
So awesome.
Ed on camera looks soooo much like an Ed Piskor drawing. 😍👍
Hopefully on my third listen I'll understand what they're actually sayin!!!
Chekhov’s Miracleman
Excellent video, guys! Lessons learned for future generations ! Love checks? LOL! Wow! Whatta circle jerk! F n lawyers/liars! I’ve been on jury duty twice and those gd suit monkeys can milk the clock! As always I find your variety of videos very interesting! Fn lawyers! Thanks again!
Killing it guys
‘Love cheques’?
Really?
Love checks....
good stuff!
This is very interesting. It's nice to know that even the mighty Neil Gaiman needs to take the occasional "Bio-Break"! I all seriousness, this is cool shit!
I bet the reason he never had a contract is because McFarlane wasn't familiar with paying royalties...isnt that the reason he (and they Image founders) left Marvel?
Yes!! Pt 4
DAMN , Big Todd !!!
Man I would want @legaleagle check this out. But yeha, lawyers playing dumb and trying to trip Neil up.
And I think Todd meant gell treat better then marvel no DC. Turns out maybe DC was treating Neil better then image and marvel
Love check seems like the weirdest and sketches thing. It's also crazy someone can throw around $120k without a contract. Man, it is almost another world listening to story from the early '90s in comics. I won't lie, I was more in Tod's camp at the beginning since as a fan Angela is now randomly in the Marvel universe? You two talked about the top of their craft but waited this long to get down to nuts and bolts? This business is insane. Looking forward to more of these vids but less of the lawyers debating which contract is which...UGH.
Once you see how the sausage is made it never looks the same again. Ask me about 25 years in the music industry! Whew!
Todd Meister pays you with love checks baby 💓!!!
Do you guys think Todd worked himself into a shoot by even hiring high end writers in the first place? The shallow books written by Todd were selling anyway.
I guess the bottom line is he should of had contracts. Erik Larson said he warned McFarlane about having a guest writer for the introduction to Heaven in his comic about Spawn being stuck in the middle of both sides. However in his testimony Gaiman makes it sound like McFarlane didn’t even have the idea of angels being involved. I’m sure in issue 4 at least the idea of Hell being at war was mentioned. So I also assumed it inevitable that angels would appear at some point.
In response to this case Dave Sims has said that if Gaiman did not wish to give McFarlane anything to be able to use in future issues he could of written a one off like he and Miller did. Instead it seems like Moore and Gaiman used their 2 issues to add a ton to the mythos of Spawn. I would argue Moore added more elements that McFarlane was able to use throughout. Whereas Gaiman’s contribution actually hindered where McFarlane could take the story. Series is almost 325 issues long and only a handful give a peek at the other side of the war.
Can’t wait for them to cover the 2nd case because all of Gaiman’s testimony there seemed to go against his case to me. He made sure to let the female judge know that had he created the visuals for Angela she would not of been depicted so bare skinned with little armor covering her body. Yet he then is suing for the other angels being depicted as having a similar look and style to them. In other words suing McFarlane for Capullo’s angels looking too much like McFarlane’s own style. After both cases anyone in the world minus McFarlane could make a book about female Valkyrie style warrior angels and not get sued. Only he can as the 2nd case is based mainly on his art style in regards to the angels.
Still a more iconic drum intro than pornhub.