He found a crooked sixpence beside a crooked stile;
He bought a crooked cat, which caught a crooked mouse,
And they all lived together in a little crooked house
Posted on 07/09/2007 6:12:39 PM PDT by doug from upland
While the cases are unrelated, they are based on the same Rights Transfer agreement that Stan Lee made with Stan Lee Entertainment in October, 1998. Under that Agreement (prior in time by 30 days to a similar Agreement Stan signed with Marvel which was also fraudulent on its face because it warranted that the October Agreement was never made) Stan Lee Media became the owner of ALL of Stan Lee's intellectual property rights for what he owned in October, 1998 and what he would create in the future. Because Marvel vioded Stan's original lifetime exclusive contract with Marvel in August 1998, all rights Stan ever owned reverted to him as of September, 1998 and were owned by him in October when he made the assignment to SLM. SLM continues to own those rights which lee hid in his administration of the Bankruptcy.
If not criminal now, what comes about under oath will contribute to a criminal prosecution down the line.
Nice post as usual Doug.
It’s clobberin’ time!
I cannot say that it has happened or will happen, but if the Trustee suspects wrongdoing by a debtor in possession, it is the job of the Trustee to make a criminal referral.
In the bankruptcy, the court approved an agreement that would allow Lee to pull out certain properties from the BK free and clear of creditors and put them into a company called SLC LLC. The purpose was to develop the characters for the benefit of the shareholders and to pay off debts. I have seen the exhibits. That company was never formed by Lee.
Instead, a few months prior to the dismissal of the bankruptcy, there are recorded documents showing a transfer of certain characters and properties to QED, a subsidiary of POW! Entertainment. There is no evidence anywhere to show that the court, the creditors, or the Trustee were aware of that transfer.
Does this mean that the trademarks, characters, and licensing were shifted away from Marvel when Ron Pearlman almost sent the company (and the whole industry) belly up in the 1990s?
What of Jack Kirby, Steve Ditko, and other CO-creators at Marvel? Did they ever get to establish partial ownership? Or did they settle for a lump sum payment?
The position of the newly reformed Stan Lee Media, under the direction of Nesfield, is that SLM owns 1/2 of the rights that are claimed by Marvel. SLM filed a $5 billion lawsuit a few months ago against Marvel. You can see the links previously provided, the two contracts made by Lee.
There are some very, very powerful attorneys representing Stan Lee Media in both cases.
I know of a similar case a friend of mine had that mirrored what you are talking about and the people they sued avoided the criminal stuff by out of court settlements for lots of money with privacy made as part of the settlement.
The stock holders want money more than Lee in jail, and now based on evidence, they will be able to force Lee to pay far more to them than they would have originally paid themselves in the investment.
Lee has totally screwed himself and could lose 85% of so of what he tried to take.
Here is a bit of a link where Lee is connected from the past for you as well.
Stan Lee was dumped by Marvel. Peter Paul was instrumental in setting him free so he could genuinely profit from his creations. At Marvel, he was only an employee. Lee later sued Marvel and got a settlement that was probably in excess of $15 million. Because of the contract signed with SLM that was never disavowed, the position of SLM is that the benefits accrue for SLM and the stockholders.
Depends on if the Judge is related to a friend of someone. Unless Lee gets that kind of break, he’s screwed... as he should be.
I don’t know anything about a resolution with Kirby and Ditko.
Yes, Lee has screwed himself. How would you like to own stock in POW! Entertainment? How would you like to be someone from Disney who recently negotiated a deal with Lee?
The complaint and exhibits are lengthy. I think they may be about 100 pages. When I have some time, I may pull a few of the exhibits for your enjoyment. The recorded documents really tell a story.
I have read some of the BK file, which took many, many hours. It only scratched the surface. Because of the contract Lee had with SLM, one would think that such contract and the rights therefrom would have been an enormous asset to be listed in the BK. Why was it not listed as an asset? It was the most valuable asset. Shareholders settled for pennies on the dollar. And now, by some superhero magic, characters and assets are part of the new POW! Entertainment. That is a big, big problem.
In the one similar case I remember, my friend went after the other folks and in discovery they threw back some 40 thousand pages of documents.
The technique was an attempt to comply with the court, but to make finding evidence against them very tough to do.
Well as I told you before once, they got a fast scanner and paper-port. Scanned all the documents in 4 days and then used the data base feature in paper-port to search for evidence of what they needed. They could bring up evidence in seconds that on other cases they would never find.
Anyway, look for a paper dump in the tens of thousands, it is what lawyers do in multimillion dollar cases.
The side benefit would be that you might find you are getting this a lot more in the public’s attention.
Think about linking your video in this thread please with Stan Lee all full of himself in that other possible piece of criminality.
Claim Against Marvel Alleges Co-Ownership of Superheroes
March 19, 2007
By Eriq Gardner
NEW YORK — The battle for control of superhero characters created by Stan
Lee is heating up, with the company formerly run by the comic book legend
suing Marvel Entertainment for billions of dollars, claiming co-ownership of
characters such as Spider-Man, the Incredible Hulk and X-Men.
The suit, filed last week in New York District Court on behalf of Stan Lee
Media Inc., claims that Lee, who was terminated in 1998 by Marvel, set up a
company and signed an “Employment Agreement/Rights Assignment” contract that
gave the co-creative interests in his characters to his new company.
According to the complaint, filed by Goodwin Proctor partner Ethan Horwitz,
the “assignment has never been terminated and continues to be in full force
and effect.”
Lee is no longer in control of SLMI, and the new suit against Marvel is the
latest development in the acrimonious relationship between Lee and the
company that bears his name.
After Lee formed SLMI in 1998 with the stated purpose of bringing his
superheroes to the digital age, the company suffered a dot-com meltdown. In
2001, it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and during bankruptcy proceedings,
shareholders installed new executives, including James Nesfield as its new
chairman and president.
Earlier this year, Lee sued SLMI’s new executives, accusing them of having
conspired to fraudulently gain control of the company and having
“misappropriated, infringed and interfered with copyrights, trademarks,
publicity rights and contract rights owned exclusively by Stan Lee and his
companies.”
The suit filed last week appears to be the company’s counterattack against
Lee. In recent years, Lee and Marvel have made amends, with Lee now serving
as president emeritus of Marvel Comics. Marvel maintains that it has full
ownership over the characters at issue and has issued a statement by Lee
that reads, “I do not support this action and believe the suit to be
baseless.”
The plaintiffs allege causes of action for accounting, declaratory relief,
constructive trust and two counts of interference with the right of
publicity. They are demanding 50% of all income, proceeds and profits
derived from Marvel’s use, marketing, licensing, merchandising, promotion,
advertising and exploitation of the Lee characters, which have been the
basis for films that have grossed billions in total boxoffice.
Nesfield said SLMI might force Lee to testify in court.
“Stan Lee is no longer with the company,” Nesfield said. “But the contract
remains intact. He has signed it, and the contract is still in force.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As a caveat and for the record, because I was in California, Jim Nesfield asked me to be the VP of the newly reformed SLM Inc. They needed someone to physically go to the storage unit and collect all of the books, records, and any remaining property. He gave me a resolution to give me that authority, and I agreed to do so. The Debtor in Possession would not allow me to take possession of the books and records. I officially resigned as VP, when that purpose could not be accomplished, and such resignation was approved. Nevertheless, the attorney for Lee named me on the lawsuit they had earlier filed.
You will find this interesting. In one of the last motions made in court, the attorney for the debtor in possession made a motion TO DESTROY CORPORATE RECORDS because they claimed they could not afford to store them. We discovered that many months earlier they paid off a large storage bill and took possession of those books and records.
Lee’s counsel has claimed that the newly reformed SLM was formed illegally. Well, there was a public notice for shareholders to come to a meeting. Lee himself was given notice of the meeting sent to his home. He, did not go to the meeting. Nesfield had the shareholders necessary and the proxies necessary to conduct business. His purpose was to save the company.
Stan has done great things in his life with the creation of superheroes who taught good messages to kids. We are going to find out what happened.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.