So, you are interested in "Bikini Cowboy" and saw my name all over the wiki submissions we have, eh? And you are probably asking yourself just exactly what a cowboy (or, in this instance, a cowgirl) does with a surfboard in the Old West. Well, dear reader, allow me to show you.
First, a surfboard is handy for shielding horseback riders fleeing from a house that was just ignited into a fiery inferno by magical flour dust.
Second, a surfboard is super handy for digging for water - provided you have a little boy with the ability to divine where water is in the first place.
Finally, a surfboard is perfect for sliding down a ravine and into your arch nemesis - again, provided you have access to one of these.
Perfectly logical, when you think about it.
Now, there is another use that gets shown in the book but it isn't necessarily an intended use. Whisky Jill, our protagonist, gets strapped to it as a sort of crucifixion. So, while it is a use, it shouldn't really count because I am sure she wasn't carrying it around just in case she got crucified by some crazy preacher.
In the end, nothing is more satisfying than using your surfboard to do this:
Yeah. While I love this book, I have no idea what happens in it.
A few weeks ago I participated in a forum in which comic book readers weighed in on the ethics of pirating. I couldn’t help but notice a severe misunderstanding as to what rights are ultimately being infringed upon when comic books (or any form of media) are pirated. I hope to shine a bright light in this area to make the topic absolutely clearer during this two-part written excursion.
For starters, the United States Congress is granted the power in the US Constitution “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” (Article I, Section 8, Clause 8. Yes, we used to capitalize everything.) 17 U.S.C. Chapter 1 was passed to enumerate the protections granted to a copyright holder.
And what exactly is a copyright? A copyright is a protection for artistic ideas that have been made available to people. To get one you basically need an original work/idea embedded in a method of tangible expression that can be observed or enjoyed. (Paraphrased very loosely from 17 U.S.C. § 102.)
How do you get a copyright?
The idea must be an original. In our comics context, let’s take Brian K. Vaughan and Fiona Staples’s “Saga.” I can’t envision anybody who reads it being able to point to any other media source and say: “Direct rip-off of such-and-such!” I mean, where else are you going to find an oddly sexy death-dealing spider lady? You could probably divine influences from certain aspects of the book but can you find these exact characters, exact scenarios, exact everything anywhere else? Nah. No way.
The bar for original expression is pretty freaking low, too. All courts and Congress require is a “modicum of creativity.” Modicums are pretty small. In addition, courts recognize that they are not proper critics for art. Almost anything – almost – can be considered an original idea.
The idea must be able to be enjoyed or reviled. Examples of tangible expression include movies, books, music (written and recorded), and even some dance routines. Back to “Saga,” Image prints the book for you to purchase somewhat monthly, as well as an option to collect many stories in one volume via trades. In addition, your computer lets you see the story unfold on many-sized screens.
Lastly, isn’t there some registration that must be done to get the copyright? Nope. Not at all. Work is copyrightable as soon as it is reduced to a form of media. That’s right: As I write this my copyrightable material expands. This very sentence is copyrighted. This next sentence is going to be copyrighted as I write it. Go ahead, join the fun and write down an original thought and enjoy the fact that you have a copyright.
Since we have tackled the copyright granted to “Saga” (in a very watered down sort of way), what does this copyright get these and any other creators? Brian K. Vaughan and Fiona Staples have several rights granted upon putting their work to paper. First, they have the right to make a copy of “Saga.” They have obviously chosen to do so since our wonderful staffers are able to review them. This creative duo also has the right to make derivative works based on “Saga,” which means that they could make the story into a dang movie if they wanted. They also have the right to sell their originals, copies, and derivative works in any legal way they see fit. Lastly, they have the right to publicly display their work. (All taken from 17 U.S.C. § 106.)
Here’s the kicker: These rights are exclusive unless permission is given. You don’t have any of these rights in their work. Say you buy a copy of the first issue. You DO NOT have the right to make a copy to give away to others – like allowing your copy to be pirated/file-shared. (Lending is fine. Sadly, giving out your online account information is not fine. See my blog on digital comic rights.) You DO NOT have the right to come up with different ways of telling the story, like making your own faithfully adapted commercial short film. (Fan fiction and YouTube videos can be interesting exceptions.) You DO NOT have the right to sell copies you make of your bought copy. You can sell your copy. You can trade your copy. You can burn your copy. You cannot sell copies of your copy. You DO NOT have the right to post copies in public – like scanning and posting full pages online. (Which, by the way, is completely against our site rules for users and which the staff can do because they have permission.)
In sum, the creators have the constitutional and statutory right to disperse their work in any way they see fit. Vaughan and Staples have decided to release “Saga” through Image. This is, so far, an exclusive deal. They also release the books digitally online in accord with an agreement Image has with various digital producers and peddlers. Anything you do that goes against these enumerated laws is infringing upon the rights of the creators. Screw the bottom line – you are taking rights away that are to solely belong to the team of Brian K. Vaughan and Fiona Staples.
Speculation abounds as to why "The Tick vs. The Mole Men" is not included in the DVD collection of the first season of "The Tick." Of the thirteen episodes, only twelve make it. Two theories have sprung up since the DVD release involving copyrights, both of which are unconfirmed because they don't hold much water.
Real quick, a copyright is granted upon the creation of an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. (See 17 USC §§ 101-122 for allusions to the law, as I don't want to site everything. This isn't a law review article.)
The first theory was that one of the characters too closely resembled Cindy Crawford. Here she is in a 1992 Pepsi commercial:
The Tick episode in question certainly does poke fun at this ad campaign. Here is a still from the episode in which Mindy Moleford does a commercial for Honesty Cola. I have included the parodic text to show the reader the light-hearted barbs being sent at Cindy.
"I’ve been drinking Honesty Cola almost as long as I’ve had my mole. In fact, drinking Honesty Cola is what’s made me an internationally famous, beautiful, supermodel. Honest."
At the DVD release, people wondered at the missing episode and the answer seemed to be that there was a copyright issue that needed to be dealt with. Some people assumed that Cindy Crawford, less than happy with her portrayal, was angry and somehow prevented the episode from airing. This has been refuted by a few sources and it is easy to see why. The character of Mindy Moleford is a caricature of Cindy Crawford and the message is actually a great commentary on using beautiful people for commercials to sell things. And, as the Tick describes commercials: "Brace yourself while corporate America tries to sell you its wretched things." The law fully allows copyrights to be exploited for the sake of commentary and parody, as long as these arguments are valid and not veiled in an attempt to simply use other people's stuff for free. (*cough, cough, "Family Guy.") So, even if the lovely Ms. Crawford were upset about Ms. Moleford she would have little legal recourse to stop the episode from being on the DVD.
The next big idea concerned the House of Ideas. Yup, people think that Marvel has something to do with the episode being left off. This also has to be wrong.
For copyright infringement, there has to be copyrighted material that is actually reproduced. If something is similar then it must be in such a manner as to not confuse consumers to avoid copyright infringement.
This is Marvel's Mole Man and the Moloids, or Subterraneans. Mole Man is a single, human man. The Moloids are odd, well, I don't know what exactly.
The characters from the Tick? Actual moles; one is a king. And they are completely docile.
So sure, there are similarities, like they all live underground, but that's about it.
On top of this, Marvel doesn't have a registered copyright on Mole Men. (A copyright must be registered in order to bring an action for infringement.) The holder of the Mole Men copyright? Would you believe some of the guys at Hanna Barbara?
Back in the 60s, there was a show called "The Herculoids." In one particularly terrible episode, Markon, the king of the Mole Men, tries to invade the surface (with two Mole Men). Here is Markon:
Here are his idiot minions:
A defense to copyright infringement is that someone created their version wholly independent of the supposed source material. With Mole Men, this could be a solid argument. Moles live underground and, if in the version of men, could want to explore other places. And they could feasibly be ruled by a king, as dictatorships are widespread in all types of societies. Sounds fine... except that Christopher McCulloch was involved with the questionable Tick episode.
Christopher McCulloch co-wrote "The Tick vs. The Mole Men." He also wrote an episode of "The Venture Bros." ("Twenty Years to Midnight") in which the Herculoids are mentioned. It is clear that there is a chance that he saw the Mole Men episode to act as inspiration for the Tick episode he wrote. That is typically all that is needed to show copyright infringement.
So there you have my theory as to why "The Tick vs. The Mole Men" has been left off the first season DVD. Hanna Barbara does not like the similarities. Let's get this rumor out there and give Cindy and Marvel a break.
I would like to think that advertising has come a long way since 1949. Since, well, because we don't advocate kids taking on bank robbers with fake guns. It helps that we don't see many bank robberies. But it also helps not having ads like this.
I recently moved to Boston to pursue a legal master's in tax at Boston University. You don't care about that. For my birthday today I decided to head downtown and see some of the historic sites. One that stood out was the Granary Burying Ground with its bevy of askew tombstones.
I felt eerily odd as I walked through between these cracked and broken headstones and I couldn't figure out why. Then I recalled the first story arc of the latest Deadpool series where Michael the Necromancer (where has that guy been lately) exhumed all the former presidents to re-revolutionize the United States. At one point, George Washington resurrects an entire graveyard of soldiers to join his cause. I couldn't help but think of that well drawn, creepy scene as I walked amongst all these dilapidated tombs.
Then I learned an odd little something. At one point, this graveyard was swampy. The earth would get so moist that the ground would sink and dead bodies would float around the land. They ended up reburying some corpses four-people-deep in the dryer spots. So not only did I recall a fake story to creep me out about these people rising from their graves, but an actual part of history relates how the dead did come forth in very unpleasant ways.
I normally hate expositive comics. The 80s were a rough time. Too much talking. Too much inner monologue-ing.
But I can't help it, I love this next scene. It may be that I am reading the latest FF and get a better sense of Leech. It may be that Iceman has a simply absurd pose. It may be that Timeshadow looks like he is holding in a mighty piss. (Who the eff is Timeshadow?) It may be that I just had too much Dr. Pepper when I read this. Regardless, I love this scene.
Now let me do something counter-intuitive and completely bash Marvel for just a moment.
Please admit that you have no idea on how to market this book. Your solicits are quite misleading. For starters, Issue 8 mentioned Puck liking jerky. Who cares? He’s not even in the issue! Also, the Love Pentagram? Who is the fifth member? Because pentagrams have five points, not four. (Count them: Psylocke, Fantomex, Cluster, and Weapon XIII. Are you counting the King Champagne?) And someone from the X-Past is playing chess across Los Angeles? We haven’t been in LA since Issue 6.
Also, you need to stop calling Uncanny X-Force a team right now. There is no team. Psylocke and Storm did a favor for Wolverine that resulted in a team-up with Puck. There has been neither a subjective nor objective decision by anyone anywhere to keep this group together as a team. Cluster and Spiral are shown as part of the “team,” but they have been side characters so far. So, this isn’t a team book and it makes things so confusing when you sell it as such.
Do, however, continue to release this book because it is fantastic.
One renegade champion (Renchamp)
*Spoilers may abound past this point. In fact, they most certainly will.*
Honestly, I bought the first issue of the latest Uncanny X-Force based on the cover alone. It was gorgeous. A new team of these sweet, mostly fringe characters was going to be fun because you could tell stories that didn’t have to conform to much of the main continuity (though I do love me some continuity).
The issue itself was a pleasant surprise. The art by Ron Garney was top notch. The colors popped. I expected a typical introductory story that explained backstories and whatnot, but Sam Humphries simply began telling a story. It was unapologetic. For me, I didn’t know why I liked it at first, but I think I ultimately decided that this approach was a breath of fresh air. My hand wasn’t held with too much background. I was thrust into the story. It was fun.
The following issues have all followed a similar format. Humphries just tells his dang story. The reader is rewarded for sticking with the series by huge reveals that never feel forced because Humphries takes his time and makes things known when they should be known. Some people call this series too slow and not forthcoming enough with answers. To them, I question whether they have ever read a novel by Charles Dickens. (Did I just compare Humphries to Dickens? I don’t even feel weird about that. I should. I don’t. Let’s continue.)
The series has already seen a few different pencilers but each has brought something special to the books they have touched. Of note, freaking Adrian Alphona. His mindscape scenes are gorgeous. Even more so, his depictions of Paris in Psylocke’s past. Alphona oozes sexy with his brash lines and devil-may-care attention to important details. (These are not real artistic phrases, but they seem to explain the allure of his work on recent issues.)
How to Read
One thing I have learned is that you really have to soak in each issue. The art should make you want to anyway. Most issues tell the story in episodes or vignettes. You get one or two pages of story here and one or two pages of story there and then another one or two pages of another story way over there. Then you bounce back and get some longer scenes and then yet another story for a page or two. You really need to keep the ducks in a row because Humphries is weaving together this very intricate tapestry of events. In sum, you must read slower than you want. The action and story move along at a decent pace but the structure takes some absorbing. (Issue 6 was really intense to follow. A story was being told about the past in the present with a scene from the future thrown in before the past's story is over in the present. Very cool approach, but you have to think it through.)
Now, allow me to show you a picture that I think personifies what Humphries is doing with this very cool yet puzzling series:
Take a look. There aren’t just girls dressed as lady heroes (every teenage boy's dream?) but male heroes. (I am personally offended that Domino is not represented.) It is explained that some guys like this sort of thing. Really? Because I see a female version of Legion and Juggernaut and both are kind of creepy. But hey, who am I to judge these fellows? (I will judge that Wolverine girl because I’d be afraid she would really have claws and just maul the crap out of me.)
Humphries seems to have an agenda about really getting into people’s minds. Things never appear normal and he takes his time showing interesting facets to each character. The mind delving is obvious early on when Storm and Psylocke go delving into Bishop’s mind. After a few issues, I can’t think this is the only mind on trial. Why did Psylocke let Demon Bear into her psyche? There has to be something going on with her to let something with the appellation “demon” to be allowed in her head.
Taking it further, Humphries seems to be enjoying the three-Fantomex paradox. Which one has Psylocke’s best interest at heart? Is Cluster really the part of Fantomex that feels? Is Psylocke being manipulated by Weapon XIII into wanting to kill Fantomex?
The big thing I sense with this incredible Fantomex web of emotion is that one doesn’t know if things are just being misdirected with the characters or if the misdirection is also happening with the reader. Are we seeing everything there is to see? We never see Fantomex with Psylocke without his mask - how can we know he is telling her the truth when she can't even read his mind to tell? I have a feeling that there must be more going on than we can know at this time. The best part, Humphries strings the reader out while reserving these revelations for the best possible time.
Even further into minds, Humphries gets into the reader’s mind by blasting them with revelations you never thought possible. In the very first issue, Fantomex kisses Cluster. What? This seemed like it could have just been a talking point for the water cooler. Why would the two possibly do this? Was it fanservice? Was it a cheap attempt to get readers interested? Turns out with Issue 8 that there was a lot more to it than any of this and it actually makes a bit of sense. (Not total sense. Humphries doesn’t work that way. I’m sure the next issue [or five issues down the line] will adequately answer this.)
Then came this bomb: Cluster and Psylocke locking lips. Really, Humphries? What is going on here!?! Was this an attempt to spark controversy? I don’t think so. I think this is where Humphries is playing his biggest mind game. Can you honestly accept the tale as told that Psylocke would spend two days in a hotel room with Cluster? As for me and my very, very conservative roots, the answer is yes. I can. It is very adequately explained through a few issues that Psylocke doesn’t quite know which Fantomex has actual feelings for her. Technically, they all do, as they all fell in love with her when they were one. But which houses the true love? The bigger question comes to light as each Fantomex makes their case: Could any ever truly have those feelings or was that misdirection too?
The beauty is that we don’t know. Humphries is doing too good of a job at dropping crumbs to be readily eaten up by readers.
As I mentioned before, this book should be read by everyone. It is complex. It is lovely to look at. It is vastly different. And it is not a team book. Yet. This is simply a book that has a fantastic niche. So, go get it.
The coolest thing for me about being a comic collector is following a character that is decades old. My favorite character is Cable and I've got just about everything he's been in, though I've only read up through 1996. (Lame.) I recently decided to read some background and finished my collection of the Inferno story arc. An advertisement caught my eye.
A Bit of Background
I had never heard of Infocomics before so I did a little investigating. As the very fine print on the ad states, Infocomics was a collaboration between some guy named Tom Snyder and a company called Infocom, a software company based out of Massachusetts. The goal was to make comic books for the computer. The idea was to make stories that would unfold on the screen that would allow the "reader" to jump from one perspective in the story to another. (I'll explain the process in a moment.) This would make the reading experience more dynamic and complete.
Three franchises were started as the flagships to this venture. Only one garnered a sequel. The gentleman in the above advertisement is Lane Mastodon, who starred in "Lane Mastodon vs. the Blubbermen." Another comic was "Gamma Force in Pit of a Thousand Screams." The last was an extension of intellectual property owned by parent company Infocom: "ZorkQuest: Assault on Egreth Castle," which was followed by the sequel "ZorkQuest II: The Crystal of Doom." This product failed to capture much attention due to its very campy storytelling, as well as the fact that comic books were way, way, way better looking.
This was a program based on the old Dos system. (To date myself, I remember using Dos in second grade to boot up the Scarab of Ra.) Once started, the screen took on the look of a comic book and the comic gave the reader a quick prologue to the story before explaining how to navigate the program. The comic flowed on a pace dictated by the reader. The reader could fast forward or rewind, pause, and jump perspectives. This last point was the crux of Infocomics's novelty. Whenever you saw the "page" fold over you could hit a button to jump to another character's perspective of what was happening in the story to more fully understand it all.
The reader could also backtrack the story and find other jump points to explore.
Walking You Through/The Experience
I was really interested in this concept that I had never, ever heard of and so I put myself out there and let the universe guide me to copies of the first three releases. (I bought them after some research on this here internet.) Here is how the comic reads for "Gamma Force in Pit of a Thousand Screams":
The comic opens with the title and and a prologue in which we meet the main heroes. This is merely a teaser, though, as then we move into instructions on how to enjoy this new comic medium.
After some intro to controls we are hurled right back into the story. It mainly follows the dastardly deeds of Nast, a terrible bad guy who burns villages, electrocutes people he merely suspects to be disloyal, and who also does stuff like this:
The story eventually wraps up after just over 30 minutes with the good guys winning. (Uh, spoiler tag?) This is without taking advantage of any jump points. You could seriously spend over an hour or two going through every scenario getting all the backstory possible out of this comic. And with graphics like these, who wouldn't want to?
The sound in the comic is the standard effects from yesteryear. Anytime something bad happens you hear the "We are here to scare you" music. Both lasers and electricity sound like diarrhea in pots and pans being dropped down stairs. There are no voices. All the dialogue is found onscreen and the narration is below the action.
Above, Lane Mastodon explained that the comic moves. Kind of. The developers did what they could with the technology they had, and that is the equivalent of making new screenshots in succession that act as a flip-book cartoon. The movement is slow. One scene takes literally five seconds for Nast to shift his gaze from one person to another. (Seriously, there is a close up of his eyes moving for five seconds.) Also, shifting from one perspective to another (as in, from far to near) is awkward since the graphics don't really mesh all that well.
There you have it. For any of you who still love to read the great comics of the 80's, this is basically what Infocomics advertisements are telling you is worth $12 of your hard earned, post-1985 recession dollars. And now you know.
*Addition: I just made a concept page for Infocomics that shows the boxes for each computer program. The 80s were awesome.
Disclaimer: This article does not constitute legal advice. This is merely information conveyed that is apparent from reading publicly available contracts.
I did a practice run at this topic a while back as I prepared for a paper. This is a more reader-friendly version of that content.
We have all heard the debates on physical comics versus digital comics. Some, like myself, are nostalgic and wish to keep the books to pass on to future generations. Some, like my brother, are modern and love having a good issue to read on the go and on almost any device.
Turning the page or swiping the screen?
The smell of print or the joy of built-in soundtracks?
Paper cuts or strained eyes?
We’ve heard the debates – we’ve even had them within our own brains – but now it is time to look at the issue from a different light: Legal.
I am a soon-to-graduate law student at the University of Wyoming. My interest in the law came about because I wanted to learn to protect the rights of artists, I having been a recovering bass player. As you might imagine, any university based in Wyoming is not going to have a strong intellectual property program. Why would they? Sheep don’t make art. But I was lucky enough to have a professor that was interested in IP law and he let me do an Independent Study in which I wrote on digital ownership rights. It was a long, boring paper (only unsexy lawyers find long, boring law papers sexy) but it pretty much amounted to this: Under current practice, the majority of you don’t own your digital comics.
Let me repeat that: Under current practice, the majority of you don’t own your digital comics. Like, at all. (I hope you used your best Taylor Swift voice for that last line.)
So what does this mean as I purchase the new Uncanny X-Force? The very first term in your objectively agreed-to contract is that Marvel.com retains all rights to the property that the consumer is accessing/downloading.
“Your use of the Web Site does not grant to you ownership of any content, code, data or materials you may access on the Web Site.” (Term 1, emphasis added.)
Then what do I get, the loyal Uncanny X-Force downloader? A “limited license.” I may use the content for my own “personal, internal use” only.
“The Web Site and the services offered on or through the Web Site, including any content and materials thereon, are only for your personal, non-commercial use.” (Term 2.)
By “purchasing” a digital comic you are actually contracting to only have a limited license to use the content. My Uncanny X-Force is only to be used by me. I can never legally sell the right to that digital issue.
This opens up many issues for debate:
Why does the site say I’m purchasing issues? Isn’t that misleading?
Why can they charge the same amount for a digital issue as a physical one when no limitations are placed on physical copies (as in, you own that book)?
Does this actually help or hinder anti-piracy policies?
What is the legality of simply giving your device’s password to a friend or relative?
The sad thing is that this is pretty standard right now across all forms of media. Music, books, games, and so on, are typically limited when bought digitally. Does this detract from your desire to “purchase” digital comics? Some say there is no price for convenience. (Actually, I just made that up.) Digital comics ownership is nothing to some because flexibility is worth any price. Some, like me, hate that my money goes to nothing more than a glorified private viewing of the comic. Give me my physical books. Give me actual ownership.
A look at other contracts for digital content will show similar things to the Marvel example, like Comixology. Very few contracts actually allow digital ownership. Check your digital contract out to see the status of ownership on what is in your digital queue.