Confusion with Quicksilver

[Chance Jackson]

So does that mean X-23 belongs to WB because she was created for X-Men Evolution?

Didn't the show only air on WB? Somehow I doubt WB studios (the same WB that owns DC) would develop an animation property based on a rival companies IP

 

[The.Brotherhood]

I dunno about mutants having separate contracts if their first appearance was outside of an X-Comic, but I can think of several cases where Marvel Studios might be able to claim overlap:


*Beast --- was a major member of the Avengers for several decades. In terms of film, Fox seems pretty clear that they intend to hold on to him, though, and I've never heard Feige & Company express any interest in acquiring him.

*Cloak & Dagger --- A few years ago, Marvel Studios were developing a TV show based on these two mutants. The show vanished into vaporware, but its existence (even on paper) muddles the copyright issues even further, since Marvel's live TV rights are allegedly a lot broader than the feature film franchises.

*Similarly, the Six Pack were in TV development for awhile, I guess as a kiddie show. All those younguns are muties.

*Namor --- he's the odd man out for right now, belonging to Universal, and they don't seem to have any plans developing a standalone movie about him at all. Chances are, at some point, Marvel Studios and Fox will start a bidding war for the rights. Not sure when those expire at Universal.

*Typhoid Mary --- technically, she's a mutant. And she appeared in Elektra, which was still a Fox movie, so there was no discrepancy there when she appeared. Nowadays, Kevin Feige has confirmed that Elektra, Kingpin and several other characters who are vital to the Daredevil mythos belong to Marvel Studios now (or are at least shared). I'd say there's a good chance that Mary would fall under the Daredevil/Elektra banner.

Thanks again! Yeah regarding beast, he's an integral part to the avengers lineup and I'm dying to see a Secret Avengers movie, maybe at some point the disney lawyers can find a loophole in regards to beast's rights (I do believe he may be on the same grey area as QS and SW).

Regarding cloak & dagger and the others, I think productions to those properties came to a halt due to the disney buying marvel, it affects the whole marvel and thus it's connection to diff. studios outside of disney.


I think what will happen to namor once disney get the rights back is probably the same as QS and SW, they can't refer to him as the first ever mutant.

 

[The.Brotherhood]

Some old mutant characters don't have separate contracts because they first appeared in non-x-men books, its just that it seems that when the film rights deals happened in the 90s there were a few mutant characters were given their own (as I said I'm sure I remember it being claimed that Cable was one of those).

BTW I don't think Cloak and Dagger are mutants, at one point in their comics they thought they were but it was later found that they weren't (possibly due to Marvel not wanting to give Fox more characters).

Can just marvel publicly issue a list or a graphical representation of those characters that belongs to the grey area or maybe they won't thus not giving the other studios the knowledge that they can use / share a certain character BUT trust me on this, if the other studios did attempt a share a character to adapt in the big screen ala Quicksilver, that character representation from the other studios will be criticize more or worse be labeled as a 'copy-cat' scheme to Marvel Studios (exception if that character appears first in the big screen before the MS version of the character but still it will still be criticize much heavily).

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Not quite. Early on people will show more faith towards the Marvel version because Marvel Studios has built up a strong reputation over a number of years and Fox has done the opposite. But ultimately it will come down to the quality of the final product. It will with Quicksilver too. If the DOFP version ends up being great and the AoU version ends up being terrible in the final products, then opinions will change.

 

[Hmarrs]

Thanks! But what I really want to know too is if Marvel Comics creates a new character let's say this year (2014) and the character is a mutant or within the x-men side, can Marvel Studios use that character for their films?

Thanks!

No actually I dont think they can if its a Mutant of any sorts that comes out from under the Xmen francise...I dont know how they made it work with Quicksilver being as he was under X-men first so technically he is X-men francise.
Because if thats the case the same argument can be made for Beast who was an Avenger for a whole lot longer.It must have been worked out from the get go on the contracts.By names our what not..."Him" ..."no not"... "him" ..."ok those two are mutua"l.Its is weird though.

 

[The.Brotherhood]

No actually I dont think they can if its a Mutant of any sorts that comes out from under the Xmen francise...I dont know how they made it work with Quicksilver being as he was under X-men first so technically he is X-men francise.
Because if thats the case the same argument can be made for Beast who was an Avenger for a whole lot longer.It must have been worked out from the get go on the contracts.By names our what not..."Him" ..."no not"... "him" ..."ok those two are mutua"l.Its is weird though.

That's what I want to happen! Beast as part of the Secret Avengers but sad to say that even if MS does share the rights to beast, the element of him being a mutant will be a hinder to the character as a whole, I know science is the name of the game in the MCU but beast not being a mutant origin kinda takes away the soul of the character.

 

[metaphysician]

So does that mean X-23 belongs to WB because she was created for X-Men Evolution?

I doubt it. My guess is, the contracts specify that new characters created as part of using the contracted IP become property of the owner of the IP. So, if Fox creates a character in their licensed X-Men cartoon, it becomes part of the license.