×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Spiderman, Sony vs Marvel

CmdrTaco posted about 11 years ago | from the legal-web-slinging dept.

Movies 250

An anonymous reader writes "It now looks like Marvel has a dispute with Sony over Spiderman. This short report tells how Sony is trying to take over Spiderman. First we saw the dispute between Marvel and Stan Lee, and now this."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

250 comments

Over marketing, the movie will go on (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754186)

See aicn for more.

Who is Spiderman? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754187)

Do you mean Spider-Man?

EXLUSIVE DRUDGE REPORT (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754199)

as in it's probably bullshit, or at the very least exagerated..

Ie; "The loss of SPIDERMAN could affect all of SONY's future financial plans for its U.S. entertainment company"

Yeah, I'm sure sony has no other way of making money and will file chapter 7 because of a little spiderman tiff.

more careful reading (3, Informative)

GunFodder (208805) | about 11 years ago | (#5754300)

I believe this quote is referring to Sony Pictures, the movie producing subsidiary of Sony. It is quite possible that the only profits Sony Pictures made last year were from Spiderman, so the economic impact of a loss of license would be huge.

I strongly object (5, Funny)

burgburgburg (574866) | about 11 years ago | (#5754344)

to your use of the modifier "probably" in your comments!

Drudge has worked very hard to ensure that everything he reports is a great big load, and your comments cast aspersions on his efforts.

Shame. SHAME!

Re:EXLUSIVE DRUDGE REPORT (1)

SoftCoreHonesty (665319) | about 11 years ago | (#5754365)

Let's see - they made $400 Million on the first movie. Let's say they would make another $500 Million on the other two (conservative in case the sequels suck). That is a pretty big hit to any companies financial plans. He doesn't say that it will bankrupt them. After all they have the Charlie's Angels movie coming soon and Anger Management already out and they also inked a $1.7B output deal with Starz a while back.

If I take $10 out of your wallet right now would it bankrupt you. No but it might affect your future dinner plans.

What a waste (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754200)

Seems silly to be arguing over MILLIONS

Stygg

Easy way out (2, Interesting)

fjordboy (169716) | about 11 years ago | (#5754204)

Stan lee just has to "discover" a couple of "unpublished" comic strips that involve Spiderman being gay and dying in some way. Sony and Marvel won't touch spiderman w/ a ten foot pole after that! The creative power is still in Lee's hands...he just needs to make use of it! Sony and Marvel will give up their claims...and Lee will get royalties galore! Easy solution.

Re:Easy way out (4, Funny)

NineNine (235196) | about 11 years ago | (#5754234)

Even better. In the next issues, it comes out that Spiderman is a pedophile!! Sony would drop that faster than a hot potato. Then Stan Lee spins the plot (after Sony went away) so that it was all some evil plot to frame Spiderman. Everything's right in the world again.

Re:Easy way out (2, Funny)

fjordboy (169716) | about 11 years ago | (#5754256)

Exactly! After making my initial post, I realized that Spiderman coming out of the closet wouldn't be all that shocking to begin with...I'm sure after watching the movie most people could have assumed that.

Why does *every* superhero have to wear skin-tight suits? Decreased wind resistent *can't* be the only reason...

Re:Easy way out (2, Funny)

NineNine (235196) | about 11 years ago | (#5754334)

Actually, there are gay superheroes already. Like Ben Affleck as Daredevil, for example! I don't believe that J-Lo thing for a second. It just screams "publicity stunt".

Skin-tight? It's fairly obvious (2, Funny)

burgburgburg (574866) | about 11 years ago | (#5754361)

They're proud of their super packages, and want to share them with the world.

In some cases, literally.

Re:Easy way out (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754375)

You'd have to be gay to turn down Kirsten Dunst lookin that hot. Time for love or not, at least have your way with with her a few times, they're both single. I mean damn, just look at that shit, she's all sorts of fine.

Re:Easy way out (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754440)

But is she a bitch? Mabe he knew that she was and turned her down because of that. Corse if i was spidey id of been like "Your dad commited suicide" and then if the kid tried to kill me i'd bring up a 9 in his dome and then have durst foevah never having to worry bout my former friend.

Re:Easy way out (1, Funny)

calethix (537786) | about 11 years ago | (#5754422)

" Stan lee just has to "discover" a couple of "unpublished" comic strips that involve Spiderman being gay and dying in some way. Sony and Marvel won't touch spiderman w/ a ten foot pole after that! The creative power is still in Lee's hands...he just needs to make use of it! Sony and Marvel will give up their claims...and Lee will get royalties galore! Easy solution."

and then after Sony forgets about Spider-Man, we'll find out that he really got aids from the spider, not the rumored gay boyfriend.

Well... (1)

Jerk City Troll (661616) | about 11 years ago | (#5754429)

Stan lee just has to "discover" a couple of "unpublished" comic strips that involve Spiderman being gay

He did turn down that really hot chick...

Re:Easy way out (3, Interesting)

King_TJ (85913) | about 11 years ago | (#5754437)

Heh.... I hate to say it, but I think Stan Lee might be the LAST person on earth to even consider a remotely "risque" situation in one of his comic strips.

As much as I think Spiderman is a great superhero concept, the Sunday comic strip (which Stan Lee supposedly does himself) is *lame*!

I guess he's trying to make sure it's ok for younger kids to read and everything, but come on! The stilted conversations are almost unbearable. There's much more suspense and sense of believability in the dialog of "Brenda Starr", for crying out loud!

I'm confused... (5, Informative)

Xerithane (13482) | about 11 years ago | (#5754205)

I see Marvel has a point with the merchandising, that they are supposed to do most of it with the joint agreement. I'm not sure how Sony is violating Marvel's rights on the Spiderman franchise because as far as I can tell, they're making movies.

This is a really horrible report, so Google News comes to the rescue and I found a fanboy site with a lot more information. [superherohype.com]

Hope it helps, because the Drudge report was just confusing.

Re:I'm confused... (4, Informative)

Dr Caleb (121505) | about 11 years ago | (#5754338)

From reading the article, I glean that Sony is advertising Spidey in such a way as to not include Marvel in any way.

"Spiderman" by Sony Entertainment. No mention of Marvel anywhere. At least, that is what I get from "MARVEL is accusing SONY of doing everything it can to disassociate SPIDERMAN and MARVEL in the minds of retailers."

Re:I'm confused... (2, Informative)

ad0gg (594412) | about 11 years ago | (#5754370)

I think sony was abusing the license for movie spiderman. Prime example is the game "Spiderman the move" [activision.com], Notice how there is no mention of marvel. Sony got the royalities since it was "based" on the movie. Also blockbuster used spiderman to advertise their products and same goes with bestbuy with spiderman in their commerical. These royalities were paid to sony not marvel.

Sony vs Marvel (5, Funny)

mrgrey (319015) | about 11 years ago | (#5754209)

Sony vs Marvel

Sony's next big console game....

Re:Sony vs Marvel (1)

unicron (20286) | about 11 years ago | (#5754508)

EVERYONE thought that when they saw it, I'm sure. I was racking my brain thinking "what the fuck is a Sony character?"

I remember the day... (4, Informative)

NineNine (235196) | about 11 years ago | (#5754210)

... when Spiderman wasn't a corporate trademark to be argued over, but just a cool comic book that I'd pick up and read. So nice to have the corporate legal eagles shit all over it.

Re:I remember the day... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754335)

But, without the trademark/copyright I could put out a comic book with Spiderman as the main character (granted it would be utter trite) and the original creator would not be able to prevent me from doing this...

So yes, trademark/copyright/lawyers may be bad, but it is much better than the alternative..

Just my 2 cents...

Re:I remember the day... (1)

Mandoric (55703) | about 11 years ago | (#5754438)

That's funny, I don't recall doujinshi (fan-published works, many of which use copyrighted/trademarked characters and situations without permission) having much of a negative impact on the Japanese comic market...

Re:I remember the day... (4, Insightful)

SoftCoreHonesty (665319) | about 11 years ago | (#5754394)

You must be pretty old because I remember owning Spiderman underoos about 30 years ago. Spiderman became an over-commercialized corporate trademark long before Sony came along. Spiderman, Batman, Hulk, and Superman were all sell outs. Now give me Ghost Rider anyday.

Sony Lee (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754212)

Sony merges with Stan Lee to become a crime fighting duo - Sony Lee. (airs 9PM EST on WGN Wedsdays)

About what I would expect from Sony (-1, Troll)

Samir Gupta (623651) | about 11 years ago | (#5754213)

Sony has a nasty habit of exploiting other people's IPs. Nintendo had a nasty falling out with them over CD-ROM technology for the SFC/SNES -- Sony wanted to own all of it, and probably would have taken control our whole platform had Nintendo not decided enough is enough.

Fortunately, at Nintendo, all our franchises are developed in house, so we've no real risk of such publically embarassing spats.

Mods! Read this guys past stories (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754258)

This guy is a poor troll. Read his past comments!

Re:About what I would expect from Sony (2, Informative)

stratjakt (596332) | about 11 years ago | (#5754260)

Your take on the Nintendo/Sony thing is wrong. Nintendo made a deal to let Sony develop the "PlayStation" CD addon for the SNES. Then they dropped them for Phillips. Then they dropped Phillips after Sony threatened to release their own SNES compatible CD playing "PlayStation". Then Nintendo gave up altogether, after watching TG16 and Sega CD fail miserably. Then Sony took the project and made it into Playstation X, which we all know and love (PSX).

Or something like that.

Anyways, dont get to riled up over a Drudge report story. The guy has a habit of taking minor day-to-day corporate memos and blowing them up into the "scoop of the century".

Re:About what I would expect from Sony (1)

Tebriel (192168) | about 11 years ago | (#5754263)

Fortunately, Sony made the Playstation out of said technology.

And gaming goodness ensued.

Re:About what I would expect from Sony (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754292)

Damn, that is a whack troll, bitch. You're a faggot, and most likely a loser as well.

Re:About what I would expect from Sony (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754297)

Somehow I find it difficult to believe a gaandu like you is in charge of anything...
By the way theren behen choad!

Nintendo troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754320)

Ah yes, the Nintendo troll is back. This guy claims to be a VP at Nintendo and speaks on their behalf often at Slashdot. Check out his prior posts: pure garbage.

OK, i'll bite (1)

mcc (14761) | about 11 years ago | (#5754329)

Fortunately, at Nintendo, all our franchises are developed in house, so we've no real risk of such publically embarassing spats.

So what's up with HAL (the Smash Brothers / Earthbound people?) are they an owned subsidiary of Nintendo or what? Or does nintendo just have an unlimited license to use their IP?

Also, what's up with the Rare IP? Microsoft owns Rare now, or whatever, but Smash Brothers Melee, a current product, still contains characters and situations from StarFox. Who owns the StarFox characters? And i assume nintendo still owns all the donkey kong IP, even though SSBM clearly uses lots of the Rare DK Country character models?

Also, i could have sworn that Ice Climber was originally made by someone other than Nintendo, but now everywhere says Nintendo owns the copyright on it. Did i just hallucinate that? And how do you unlock Ice Climber in Animal Crossing short of buying an Action Replay, dammit?

What's up with all that?

Re:OK, i'll bite (1)

Slashdot Insider (623670) | about 11 years ago | (#5754424)

HAL is a part of Nintendo. As for Rare, they never had any ownership over Star Fox or DK. Those were created by Nintendo and Rare made a few of those games because Nintendo asked them to.

Re:About what I would expect from Sony (1)

The Lynxpro (657990) | about 11 years ago | (#5754497)

Nintendo also "has a nasty habit of exploiting other people's IP." I think that was the basis for Atari Corp. suing them many years ago after failing to win the antitrust case.... If memory serves me correctly, Nintendo paid up $150 million or so...which wasn't bad in early 1990s dollars...

Additional info (1)

Psychic Burrito (611532) | about 11 years ago | (#5754219)

Here's a bit more info: Don't Worry about THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN [aintitcool.com].

Excuse me? (1)

loteck (533317) | about 11 years ago | (#5754421)

umm.. does anyone but me notice that this article randomly links off to many small sections of what appear to be the soon-to-be-released Xmen 2 movie? i'm not saying they are trailers. i'm saying they are actual clips from the movie in .mov format. Has X2 been leaked?

Re:Additional info (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754492)

AICN; now THERE'S a fucking bastion of journalistic ethics and integrity.

Sony has a plan. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754222)

It's all an evil plot by Sony to take over the world. First, they nab a superhero and put them under their clutches. Then, if they get more, who will be able to save us from Sony? I'm sure the Daredevil, Fantastic Four, or maybe even Captain America will come to his rescue. But then Sony will use their superlawyers to conquer them if they're not careful. The superheros must band together!

Today must be a really slow news day (1, Informative)

JJAnon (180699) | about 11 years ago | (#5754224)

First off, we have a story from the Weekly World news, and then now we have one from the Drurge report.

What is this? Yellow journalism day?

Re:Today must be a really slow news day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754302)

You must not know your news reports because drudge is one of the best out there. I would be very careful about talking about sites you don't visit.

New fighting game? (1)

vosbert (544192) | about 11 years ago | (#5754231)

I'd like to see the game Marvel versus Sony.

Re:New fighting game? (1)

NineNine (235196) | about 11 years ago | (#5754291)

I'd like to see the game Marvel versus Sony.

What do you think that'd be like? The X-Men vs. a bunch of Japanese lawyers with legal pads, and really big pens? Would the Sony guys hurl affidavits and contracts? Could you stop them with some well-placed sushi? Would the have cell-phones with massive amounts of radiation?

I'd rather see (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754232)

Spiderman, Sony and Marvel vs Batman,Yamaha and DC.

3 on 3, the way fighting should be.

The only way to resolve this... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754239)

Is for me to show Kirsten Dunst my organic web-shooter.

Re:The only way to resolve this... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754330)


But how do we fill all the time until she stops laughing?

Re:The only way to resolve this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754462)

More importantly... how long will she poke through the rolls of fat before she gives up trying to find it?

Goatseman,Goatseman (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754240)

Does all the things that a goatse [slashdot.org] can....

F Sorny (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754241)

Next time I'm getting a Magnetbox!

Marvel's next superhero (4, Funny)

Infonaut (96956) | about 11 years ago | (#5754242)

should be "LawyerMan". Armed with the Pen of Destruction and the Briefcase of Neverending Legal Briefs, he wages war in the shadowy world of corporate dealings.

And he never loses. Well, maybe he loses every so often to make things interesting, but he always wins on appeal ;-)

Re:Marvel's next superhero (1, Informative)

Jack Comics (631233) | about 11 years ago | (#5754420)

Ironically enough, Marvel already has this... the super-hero's name is DareDevil. Lawyer at day, avenging super-hero at night. The "twist" is the character is blind, supposedly from an accident in his childhood, but I don't buy that. He really went blind from an internship at a law firm on hire by Microsoft. Reading all that legal mumbo-jumbo and helping Microsoft prevail against the Department of Justice would make anybody blind.

Literally kidnapped? (5, Funny)

sssmashy (612587) | about 11 years ago | (#5754251)

MARVEL accuses SONY of literally kidnapping Spidey.

SONY literally kidnapped Spiderman? What, a bunch of Sony exectuves have Spidey chained up in the basement of their corporate HQ? This sounds like a good plot for the next comic book... sure, Spidey can defeat the Green Goblin, but does he stand a chance against capitalism run amok?

I've said it before.. (5, Insightful)

NanoGator (522640) | about 11 years ago | (#5754253)

Sony's every bit as evil as you guys thing Microsoft is. I don't know why they're not on Slashdot's radar.

The basic gist of the complaint is that they are attempting to rebrand Spiderman as a Sony product. Though I don't have any opinion as to whether they're guilty here or not as I don't have enough info to base an opinion on, I do know that Sony's been complained about before. Anybody remember when they were developing the Super NES CD that never arrived? It fell through because Sony wanted this to be a Sony branded machine. They basically wanted to take over Nintendo's well developed market. Fortunately, Nintendo had the balls to stand up to them. That's indirectly how Sony came around with the Playstation.

Slashdot really should be eyeballing Sony. Sometimes you guys pay too much attention to Microsoft.

Re:I've said it before.. (5, Insightful)

mojowantshappy (605815) | about 11 years ago | (#5754313)

Mostly because Sony is the big competition for the X-Box, so a lot of anti-microsoft people like to rally behind them (me included).

Also, Sony is quite broken up compared to most companies. They have their movie division, their music division, their computer division, their video games division, etc. So though I really hate Sony's music and movie division, I still like their video game division.

Also, offering linux for PS2 can't hurt.

Re:I've said it before.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754380)

Mostly because Sony is the big competition for the X-Box, so a lot of anti-microsoft people like to rally behind them (me included).

What a way to stand up for your values and REALLY make a difference in the world! So you take the self-denial of a I'll-work-for-free-because-I-think-my-software-wil l-rock-Microsoft to the extreme by buying a Playstation instead of an X-Box. Way to go - rally your support behind one mega corporation because you don't like another mega corporation.

So do you drink Coke or Pepsi?

Re:I've said it before.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754354)

It's a THURSDAY you idiot!. Today's MS hating day.

No lie, Sony's a bunch of jerks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754384)

It's impossible to get parts or service manuals for their products. They treat their employees like felons (I had the misfortune to work at their US product returns warehouse one summer). They try to push their crappy proprietary stuff (Minidisk, memory stick) down everyone's throats. The company is incredibilly arrogant.

I've been boycotting them for years.

Re:I've said it before.. (1)

DJProtoss (589443) | about 11 years ago | (#5754470)

So if Marvel stands up to them then sony will come up with a kick-ass superhero? cool.

Knowles Knows (4, Informative)

Malicious (567158) | about 11 years ago | (#5754266)

Harry Knowles has explained the scenario [aintitcool.com] pretty well already.

Great post... (1)

Dave21212 (256924) | about 11 years ago | (#5754322)


Thanks for the link... at least Harry bothered to talk to a real person before conclusion jumping (which should be an Olympic sport these days)

Spiderman is dead, Long Live Spidey !

Lots of accusations but no proof. (4, Funny)

gpinzone (531794) | about 11 years ago | (#5754268)

What a waste. I actually read the article first before posting this time. I've learned my lesson.

Dance with the devil... (2, Interesting)

Jace of Fuse! (72042) | about 11 years ago | (#5754275)

Look, everyone here at Slashdot should realize Sony is a big evil megacorp akin to (or worse than) Microsoft. Sony goes through some really big lawsuits all the time, some of them for doing some really fucked up shit.

It's not news. It's Sony. So, while I hope Marvel comes out ahead through all this (either by gaining more money, correcting the situation, or taking Spiderman from Sony altogether) I still can't help but wonder what exactly Marvel expected from Sony?

Contracts? In the hands of an evil entity like Sony, contracts don't mean anything that money can't change.

Ethics? There is no ethics in business.

Plain old common sense? HAHAHAHAH

You know what they say about dancing with the devil....

Spiderman should be in the public domain by now (2, Insightful)

asscroft (610290) | about 11 years ago | (#5754276)

All this copyright crap is backfiring on these corporations. It's ridiculous. By now Spiderman is so commonly known that it would be terribly hard to "damage" the image of Spiderman, even if it was "hijacked" by modern day story tellers. I mean the "proper rights owners" killed superman and none of us bought that bullshit, did we? If copyright lasted only the 12 years or whatever it was supposed to last this wouldn't be a problem. Whoever told the best Spiderman story would be king of the box office, not whoever won the court battle.

Re:Spiderman should be in the public domain by now (2, Insightful)

iamblades (238964) | about 11 years ago | (#5754511)

Well, all that's fine and good, but this is about trademarks, not copyright.

Trademark doesnt expire, it gets diluted, and this is probably one of the driving reasons behind this lawsuit.

in my next life... (2, Insightful)

mario (94577) | about 11 years ago | (#5754283)

..I'll study law and specialize in copyright issues - I think the chances *not* to have a well-paid job are very low, if I look at the numerous stories about problems, that some companies seem to have in this area :)

This sounds familiar.. (2, Funny)

xRelisH (647464) | about 11 years ago | (#5754286)

Why does this remind me of two young kids in the playground, with one whining:

"It was mine first, give it back!"
"Nuh uh, you gave it to me!"
"Did not!"
"Did too!"
"Did not!"
"Did too!"
...

Pulp fiction (1)

mabu (178417) | about 11 years ago | (#5754287)

I want to know how come Peter Parker didn't see this coming with his tingling spider sense?

By The Steps: (1)

SmartGamer (631767) | about 11 years ago | (#5754299)

1. Sony purchases Spiderman rights from Marvel.
2. Sony makes a buttload of money.
3. Sony tries to advertise that they did everything they did with the more recent "Spiderman" stuff.
4. Marvel gets jealous, attempts to revoke license.

Am I missing something here? Does Marvel have a case?

Re:By The Steps: (4, Insightful)

ebbomega (410207) | about 11 years ago | (#5754464)

By the looks of it, yes. Seemingly, Marvel had a license with Sony about the Merchandise, but now it looks like Sony has broken the terms of that license and now Marvel is asking to have it chucked out. The report has got to be one of the worst written articles I've ever seen and it doesn't explain much, most importantly it seems we have ZERO clue what the main clauses are that are going to be used since it seems that the license may not be publically available until the case itself.

I think it's quite possible that Marvel has a case. Pretty probable too... big companies tend not to go up against bigger better companies that could buy their ass out unless they happen to be faltering *coughSCOcough*.

Marvel's doing better than ever. Movie exposure is enticing more and more people to read superhero comics and it seems to have moved once again away from the stereotypical fanboy and more into the traditional playgrounds of childhood fantasy.

Marvel wouldn't cut the rug out from underneath them by ending a contract with SONY without good reason. Obviously there's tension between the two companies and Marvel wants out of the contract so they can build a better relationship with a different company.

Fine. No real harsh damage done to anything really except that Sony doesn't get a third Spidey movie. I don't even know if Sam Raimi's going to want to touch a third Spidey movie, and most likely there's going to be lots of FUD around a third movie any ways, cuz frankly I don't know if people have forgotten about Batman Forever and Batman and Robin yet.

IN CAPITALIST JAPAN (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754315)

SONY OWNS YOU!!!

1 in 4, for taco (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754343)

4 post in a row from CmdrTaco, and only one of them is a fake, he's getting better and better ...

The short(s) of it (1)

molrak (541582) | about 11 years ago | (#5754351)

'Spiderman 2' will not be affected by this, the film will be out next May. Merchandising will be affected, and most probably, a lot of those crappy commercials/ads with Spidey in them (cough, verizon) won't appear next year. Marvel will have problems that Sony hasn't paid them fully for merchandising--that part of the case, I believe, will closely mirror the people who used to own Winnie the Poo's suit against Disney (which Disney won).

To put it briefly, buy your movie-themed Spidey Underoos and Spidey faceplate for your cell phone now, because they won't be around for long. Spidey 2 will be out next year, released by Sony. Look for Spidey 3, should it happen, to possibly be financed by another studio.

Settle this out of court... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754372)

... just have the CEOs of Sony and Marvel dress up in spandex costums and duke it out on the streets of NY. Best way to handle this situation.

Come to think of it, maybe all litigation should be handled this way.
Hmmmm..............

Sad news :( Robert Atkins, diet doctor, dead at 72 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754415)

I just heard the sad news on Talk Radio -- Diet Doctor Robert Atkins was found dead in his Maine home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him -- even if you didn't read his "New Diet Revolution" books there's no denying his contribution to nutritional science. Truly an American icon.

Re:Sad news :( Robert Atkins, diet doctor, dead at (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754452)

WTF?

Marvel to employ Iraqi Information Manager ... (4, Funny)

binaryDigit (557647) | about 11 years ago | (#5754484)

As new Minister of Marketing.

"Those infidels at Sony don't even have the rights to the character at all. If they think they do, it's all in their minds"

"I feel safe from Sony, so should you"

"They are going to surrender or burn inside their little rice burners"

"Sony has never made a Spiderman film! This I tell you!"

"We will welcome them, with lawyers and taunts!"

"they are nowhere near completion on the sequel ..they are lost in the Australian desert...they can not read a compass...they are retarded."

Who cares about SPIDERMAN? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#5754504)

As long as they don't fight over SPIDER-MAN (which is the proper way to write it, according to Mr. Lee himself).

Who cares? (1)

gpinzone (531794) | about 11 years ago | (#5754519)

One megacorporation sues a mega-megacorporation. Boo hoo. In other news, the new Hulk trailer is coming out May 2nd! Now that's some real news!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...