Talk:Copyright

Various comments

This article is generally good but could use a bit of tweaking in a few areas. In particular copyright laws and the terminology varies from country to country and it's probably best to make it clear upfront that the default in the article is US law and also make all non-US cases separate paragraphs. In particular from my own limited IP experience "work for hire" is a concept that doesn't exist in UK law. Although we have a standard of "works produce by an employee in the course of their employment are default copyright of the employer", the employee is still the author with author's rights. It's very confusing to use such a legal term casually.

Regarding Titan seemingly having no problem with Circuit Breaker and Spider-Man, it's my memory that back in the 1990s Titan had the UK licence for Marvel trade paperbacks but rather mucked it up with over expensive short books and eventually abandoned publication. If that was them they may still have had that licence come the early 2000s and thus could print material from multiple properties. Or alternatively they may have got the licences cheaply when it was thought not likely to last (note also the odd order to get Furman's favourite run out first).

As for the ownership of the Neo-Knights material, Marvel has certainly managed to retain and use some of its own creations despite losing the licences for the likes of Micronauts and ROM, so they may well have had clauses that would have made it possible to extract the Neo-Knights for a spin-off book. I suspect the general poor US state of the franchise c1991 also meant Hasbro may not have cared too much and things could have slipped through. Timrollpickering 16:44, 23 June 2012 (EDT)

(Years later but it seems it was actually Boxtree who had the rights in the period.) Timrollpickering (talk) 12:41, 7 September 2018 (EDT)