But Len Wein knew that Martin Landau was on Mission Impossible, so there's the difference.

Which has nothing to do with either of them getting paid, which is apparently the new criteria for whether someone is or isn't a dolt.

I can settle this right now.

Lisa Kennedy is a dolt.

I know Moore doesn't want to even deal with this anymore so he's just given up, BUT, from what I understand of the contract that Moore signed with DC -- it was a publishing contract and not necessarily a grant of ownership in the characters themselves. The reason I say this is that DC's behavior over the last 25 years or so, including the toy and other marketing materials that came out around the time of the film. Up until BEFORE WATCHMEN, DC's behavior demonstrated that they knew they did not possess ownership of the characters except in connection with the film and TV license that they entered into way back in the late 80s. It was a topic of discussion at the time of the movie because DC essentially acknowledged that they couldn't even produce variants of the toy line based on the graphic novel because that was not a part of the rights they retained in the contract.

I'm going to go out on a limb and just suggest that their move here is a basic corporate asshole move to assert an implicit ownership now, even though they've acknowledged for decades that they didn't have any ownership other than the publishing rights and the film licensing rights and all derivatives from that license. In other words, they are asserting a copyright/trademark version of "Adverse Possession" (1) actual possession of the disputed property; (2) under a claim of right; and (3) that is adverse or hostile to the claim of another person. That's an aspect of Property Law, but it's pretty much analagous to what they are doing here too.

But the real slippery thing I think DC is doing is that, while they are gambling that Moore will not mount a legal challenge, even if he does, they are prepared to argue that these prequels and sequels are not derivatives of the graphic novel itself but are derivative works based entirely upon the film alone.

And by that standard, as weaselly as it is, they probably have a solid grounding to win that battle.

So it becomes a legally moot issue.

It's still weaselly.

And I'm glad Moore still has enough in him to at least say it the way he feels it when someone flat out asks him. Notice that he doesn't go out there with a press release and make these statements, they are responses to someone else's questions to him. My feeling would be that if you don't want an honest answer from him, don't ask. But it's a 100% more truth than you'll ever get from someone on staff at DC and/or having had to sign one of those vicious little non-disclosures that DC pushes onto everyone now.

I agree.

This thread has become a doltery.

Thou shalt not commit a doltery.

Do you really want to earn the ire of Moore's serpent magic?

Also, the difference is that Swamp Thing is not Watchmen. Nor was it intended to be. Alan Moore doesn't complain about Constantine.

He'd be like a pale version of Thulsa Doom from the Arnie version of Conan.

He'd urge some nubile young girl to go and buy a copy of Lost Girls....and then she'd blindly do so, heedless of the danger. And Arnie would cry out "Noooooo".

You must be joking, or skimmed my post, since I said that he'd have almost certainly gotten noticed one way or the other...as in "worked in American comics". But also as in "but not on Swamp Thing, and thus (potentially!), no Gaiman Sandman, or a slightly altered one, possibly no Watchmen, or an earlier/later, but different one. If you can't see how Moore's career path may have been altered by not doing Swamp Thing, then you must be a Claremont reader.

Okay, that last line is below the belt.

Also, if I'm not mistaken Wein was the editor of Swamp Thing who chose who to hire to write the book, so ownership is irrelevant; Wein truly did get to make the call, as editor.

Yes, it was uncalled for.

I can't keep up with the pwning. Let me know if I miss my turn.

Exactly. I still believe the Moore people are so hung up on Wein's possible exaggeration that they miss the point: if Len felt as Alan does, then Moore's Swamp Thing never happens.

It is pretty ballsy to approve a total retcon (or whatever that was) of your character by another creator.

I didn't skim your post. I pointed out that if you believe that Moore still would have had a career in America, then Len is not right. He is wrong.

Now who's skimming? This ground has been covered in the last few pages.

No one disagrees with what you've just said.

I don't remember anyone mentioning he was editor. But I was replying as I went along, not reading the entire thread and then replying, so no skimming. Fail.

I need to Wein myself off of this thread.