Ever since the announcement of Before Watchmen earlier this year, the hot topic in comic book circles is the ethical and moral issues raised by decisions like these. While this isn’t a new debate, it has certainly gained a new momentum this year, and could be said to be reaching fever pitch, as creators are beginning to speak out against some of the biggest companies in the business. So is the tide beginning to turn on these morally ambiguous business practices? It appears to be less clear-cut than that, as even fans are divided on what exactly is right and wrong.
The Before Watchmen debate centres on the long and difficult history between Watchmen writer Alan Moore and publishing powerhouse DC. Many fans feel that Moore signed a contract which DC knew would benefit their interests solely and basically screw Moore out of the rights to his work. Legal technicalities aside, the crux of this argument is that DC acted in bad faith when it came to Moore. They didn’t break any legal contracts, but they broke their word and acted in the best interest of the company, not the creator. This moral grey area means that it is an issue which divides fans, with many thinking Moore got the best deal at the time, and the chips just happened to fall in DC’s favour. It was bad luck and DC are entitled to do whatever they like with the characters they own. Others feel that Before Watchmen is a shameless money-grubbing exercise, and are boycotting it accordingly. It’s clear that there is no definitive ‘right’ answer here. But this is just the tip of the iceberg.
There has been a long and bitter debate over the treatment of Superman creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Schuster and their families. Siegel and Schuster sold the rights to Superman to DC for the measly sum of $130 before anybody had any inkling of just how important and recognisable a pop culture icon he would go on to become. Copyrights on the character are now worth millions of dollars and there has been a complicated back and forth legal battle for years. The US copyright law at the centre of this is convoluted, but the basic idea is that DC deliberately low-balled Siegel and Schuster, taking advantage of their inexperience, and then registered Superman in the company’s name, listing the creators as work-for-hire employees. Sounds devious and under-handed, right? Well, that’s open to interpretation. And it has been interpreted many ways ever since, with some fans describing the heirs of Siegel and Schuster as greedy opportunists and others seeing DC as a greedy and corrupt corporation.
The matter got even more heated this week when DC writer Chris Roberson spoke out about why he was leaving DC. The exact timescale on this is a little bit muddy too. It could be said that he took this opportunity to speak out as his comic, iZombie, had just been cancelled and felt he had nothing to lose. He did, in fact, have a little to lose as he was lined up to write a short story arc on DC owned series, Fairest. And as soon as his less than glowing opinions of his paymasters hit the internet, he was sacked. However you cut it that is a fair response from DC. You can’t go and bad mouth your employer all over the internet and press and not expect to get fired for it. There is now some debate over whether this was a case of ‘you can’t fire me, I quit’ or ‘you can’t quit, you’re fired.’ Again, and as always, fans will never know the truth and can only choose their sides based on their own feelings on the issue. But the interesting thing here is that he took a stand, he spoke out, and he may be the first in a long line of creators willing to call the big companies out on their morally dubious practises.
There’s no denying that ownership and rights disputes are beginning to overshadow a lot of new project announcements from Marvel and DC. Even the new Avengers movie, which should seem like solid legal ground for Marvel, has had its moral objectors too, and it all boils down to creator rights. I have my own opinions on the matter, but that aside, the ethical debate is having an effect on my enjoyment of superhero comics, as I’m sure is the case for many others. The comic industry is a relatively small and niche market, and can’t afford to be alienating readers. Does this mean a shift in the attitudes and practices of the biggest names in the business? Only time will tell, but the more willing creators are to speak out about objectionable treatment, the closer we’ll get to being able to focus solely on characters and stories, and not the behind the scenes politics.
