One of the great things about the comic book community is how close-knit it can be. As a group of people with a fairly uncommon interest, it can be really great to have others to discuss a shared passion with. At the same time, however, this tight connection also makes it incredibly easy for misinformation to not only spread, but thrive. The purpose of this article series is to help dispel those mighty misconceptions. The topic for this article:
There are few things that can be harder to untangle and understand than intellectual property rights, especially when it comes to comic books. After all, many of these characters were created more than 50 years ago and their ownership is still being debated. The following is an attempt to demistify this confusing topic for speculators so that they can make maximally informed decisions when it comes to the MCU.
In 2014, Sony Pictures was hacked by the North Korean government because the former was releasing The Interview, a comedy that painted North Korea and its leader, Kim Jong-Un, in a negative light. The documents from this hack were eventually obtained, organized, and released by Wiki Leaks. Included in that hack were several documents outlining the precise nature of Marvel and Sony’s relationship as it related to Spider-Man, for whom Marvel had sold many of the television and film rights. This makes Spider-Man and his extended cast of characters very unique because, unlike other characters, we know exactly who owns them and why. To that end, I will strive to directly quote or cite the aformentioned documents as much as possible.
First, lets be clear what is being referred to when this article says Sony has the rights to a particular character or idea. Under Section 2 of the Executive Agreement, Sony’s character rights cover live action films, animated films, live action television series, and animated television series with episodes longer than 44 minutes. Everything else, like video games, comics, or animated shows with episodes that are less than 44 minutes long, belongs to Disney and, by extension, Marvel. Section 5, subsection a of that same document also specifies that Sony has full creative control over these films, meaning that elements like the inclusion of Iron Man in Spider-Man: Homecoming and what some fans call the “Iron Man Jr problem” were quite possibly instituted at the behest of Sony rather than Marvel.
Next, lets try and knock some of the easy stuff out of the way. As per Section 1, subsection a, bullet one of the Executive Summary, Sony has the rights to “The ‘Spider-Man’ character, ‘Peter Parker’ and essentially all existing and future alternate versions, iterations, and alter egos of the ‘Spider-Man’ character.” What this is saying is that Sony has the rights to the Spider-Man character and all the different versions of him. So that means characters like Spider-Man 2099, the Scarlet Spider, and Spider-Girl all belong to Sony. Bullet 2 of that same document states that Sony also has the rights to “All fictional characters, places structures, businesses, groups, or other entities or elements (collectively, ‘Creative Elements’) that are listed on the attached Schedule 6”. Schedule 6 was a section of the Executive Summary that detailed the MANY characters and creative elements that Sony has the rights to. That full list, which contains multiple thousands of items, can be found here. The list can basically be summarized as (almost) any character or idea that has “Spider” in it’s name or that primarily appears in a Spider-Man or Spider-Man related comic.
From there, things get a little more complicated. While that Schedule 6 list is incredibly long, it was never intended to be exhaustive. Bullet three of executive summary contains what is essentially a catch-all provision stating that Sony has the rights to “All existing (as of 9/15/11) characters and other Creative Elements that are ‘Primarily Associated With’ Spider-Man but were ‘Inadvertently Omitted’ from Schedule 6”. While there is no definition of “Primarily Associated With” provided in that document, its meaning can be gleaned from some of the discussion documents that were also part of the leak. Essentially, what it boils down to is the idea that, if most of a character’s appearances are in Spider-Man books, or a strong plurality of the appearances are in Spider-Man books and the remaining appearances are scattered, then Sony has the rights. A good example of this is the character The Tinkerer. The majority of the Tinkerer’s appearances are not in Spider-Man books, but a large plurality of them are and the rest are largely unrelated to each other. Please note that, up until this point, the first appearance of a character or idea in a comic book has NOT been a relevant factor. That, however, is about to change.
When it comes to new characters (characters created after the deal signing date on 9/15/11), the main criteria of interest is the title of the book the character first appeared in. In one of the term sheets, it is stated that “With respect to new characters…the exclusive rights granted…shall extend to and specifically include all new characters which first appear in any New Authorized Work which has in its main title “Spider”, “Spider-Man”, “Peter Parker” or the name of another Approved Character”. This is a really key provision, so it is important that we all be crystal clear as to what it means. If a character makes their first appearance in a Spider-Man book or the book of another character that Sony owns the rights to, then Sony owns the rights to that new character as well. In the aformentioned discussion documents, Sony goes so far as to provide a (non-exhaustive) list of example books, including “Amazing Spider-Man”, “Black Cat”, and “Venom”. And yet, as with just about all things in life, there are some exceptions to these rules.
First, there is the Kingpin. Due to his strong association with Daredevil as well as Spider-Man, his rights are split. The executive summary specifies that, while both Sony and Marvel may use Kingpin, the latter’s use “is restricted to use in connection with Daredevil and other characters with which he appeared prior to 9/15/11”. This would seem to imply that the Kingpin could not appear in projects centered around characters he never interacted with in comic published prior to 9/15/11, but the exact extent of that restriction is not certain. It is not clear whether that means he cannot appear in scenes with those characters by himself, with those characters and others whom he had interacted with in comics prior to 9/15/11, or even if he cannot appear in any project with them at all. It should be noted that this version of the Sony-Marvel agreement was drafted before the rights to Daredevil had returned to Marvel and, as such, there is a chance this language was amended in subsequent agreements.
Spider-Woman is an interesting one. On the one hand, neither her backstory nor any meaningful number of her comic book appearances involve Spider-Man. At the same time, however, she was originally created purely to maintain the Spider-Man trademark and it would be incredibly easy for a typical consumer not to be aware of that and think she was part of the larger Marvel Spider brand. As a result, much like Kingpin, her rights are split. Per the Executive Summary, Sony is allowed to use “Jessica Drew [Spider-Woman’s true identity] as Spider-Woman, and Marvel may only use her without any Spider-Man-related elements.” So basically, Sony can use the character as long as she has a spider motif going and Marvel can use her as long as she does not.
For the Executive Summary, Marvel provided a (non-exhaustive) list of characters they wanted to call out as being reserved for their use. That list can be found here. Some notable characters include Firestar (who first appeared in a Spider-Man cartoon and then a Spider-Man comic, but is primarily associated with the Marvel owned New Warriors), The Owl (Who appeared extensively in Spider-Man comics, but was never primarily associated with him), The Punisher (who first appeared in a Spider-Man comic and has since very much become a brand onto himself), and Cloak and Dagger (who’s first several appearances were in Spider-Man comics, but have since operated largely independently of Spider-Man).
In addition to characters that only Sony can use and only Marvel can use, there are also characters that neither can use. This list, which was also part of the Executive Summary, can be found here. Characters in this list, for the most part, fall into one of three categories: mashup characters (like Spider-Hulk or Cosmic-Carnage, because each studio effectively owns half the rights), anthropormophic versions of the characters (like the Hobgobbler), or characters created for previous television shows (Like Professor Gizmo from the 1981 Spider-Man cartoon). Not surprisingly, there are some specific exceptions here as well:
There are also some interesting characters that are specified to be frozen, including Bag-Man, Cosmic Spider-Man, all of the Marvel Zombies, Marvel Apes, and What If…? versions of the characters from Schedule 6, and Ashley Barton, a.k.a. Spider-Bitch.
A common point of confusion amongst some comic book speculators is who exactly owns the film and television rights to the character Knull. Part of this confusion stems from the fact that Knull was retconned to have had an appearance in Thor: God of Thunder #6, a book that definitely does not fall under Sony’s ownership. Now, personally, I do not believe that Thor book should be considered a first appearance. There is zero evidence to suggest that, when Jason Aaron wrote that comic in 2013, he had the character of Knull in mind. No elements of Knull’s characterization or design are present there and almost none of his backstory is present either. To argue that Knull’s true first appearance was in Thor: God of Thunder #6 (and thus that his rights do not belong to Sony) is to argue that Jason Aaron created the character in 2013, as opposed to Donny Cates and Ryan Stegman (the near-universally recognized creators) in the pages of Venom #3 in 2018. That is like arguing that Randy Schueller, who created Spider-Man’s black costume, should also be credited with creating Venom, even though damn near everybody, including Schueller himself, thinks that is not the case.
For the sake of argument though, lets assume that I am wrong here and a legal proceeding would find that Knull first appeared in the pages of Thor: God of Thunder. What would the rights situation look like then? Well, according to section 1, subsection a, bullet 5 of the Executive Summary, Sony has the rights to the “origin story, secret identities, alter egos, powers, costumes, equipment, and other elements of, or associated with, Spider-Man and the [items listed in Schedule 6]”. From that clause, we can safely say that Sony owns the origin story, secret identities, alter egos, powers, costumes, equipment, and other elements of the symbiotes, as all of the symbiote characters are listed there. Given that, lets lay out the possibilities:
So basically, even if Marvel could use Knull, they could not really use Knull.
Unlike Spider-Man, no formal documentation has ever been released concerning the film and television rights of Hulk, She-Hulk, or Namor. As a result, the analysis of their rights situations will have to rely much more on secondary sources. First, lets start out with what we know: Marvel owns the film rights to all of these characters. What Marvel does not own, however, is their distribution rights. Those rights are held by Universal, but in a specific capacity: those distribution rights only extend to solo projects. That is (part of) the reason there has never been a sequel to The Incredible Hulk, but the Hulk has still been able to appear in projects like The Avengers or Thor: Ragnarok. Presumably, these same parameters apply to Namor, which would explain why Kevin Feige stated the character could appear in an MCU project – as long as it is not a solo project, Namor should be usable. As for She-Hulk, there are numerous possibilities, with the most likely possibilities being that the Marvel-Universal deal did not cover streaming television shows, She-Hulk’s TV rights were not part of the deal, or the She-Hulk Disney Plus series somehow does not count as a solo project.
Both ROM and The Micronauts were licensed comics from Hasbro. Once those licenses were up, the rights reverted back to Hasbro. This means that Marvel cannot use ROM, the Space Knights, The Micronauts, or the Microverse in an MCU production. It is not entirely clear whether characters like Bug or Captain Universe, who first appeared the Micronauts comic, but were original creations of Marvel, are owned by Hasbro or Marvel.
I hope I was able to bring some clarity to this confusing topic, let me know if you have any questions!
