Royalties

Lars Olav Karlsen donald at lokarlsen.com
Wed Aug 4 17:02:09 CEST 2004


You are asking more then ten wise men can answer :)

How the artists feel I can't answer but I guess it is different from
artist to artist. Carl Barks was once asked if he disliked the idea that
he never got any credit and always had to sign Walt Disney. He then
answered that he really never cared as long as he got his check. I guess
this depends on every person involved.

I have no knowledge to how other comic publishers or publishers of
novels do it, but your competitions with movie directors are not bad.
You probably know that not many directors have the privilege to make the
final cut. Steven Spielberg is one of those famous directors that
finally were so tired of not getting made what he wanted that he started
his own studio (SKG Dreamworks - the "S" stands for Spielberg).

You are correct in the assumption that if anybody at all should pay
royalties then it should be the publishers. Disney has no connection
what so ever with the artists. I was writing my last answer to you while
Don Rosa was writing his so I did not see it before I was finished. He
also stated something about this so you should absolutely read that as
well.

Lars Olav Karlsen
Oslo, Norway

-----Original Message-----
From: Cord Wiljes [mailto:cord at wiljes.de] 
Sent: 4. august 2004 16:44
To: 'Lars Olav Karlsen'; dcml at stp.ling.uu.se
Cc: Cord Wiljes
Subject: AW: Royalties

Lars Olav Karlsen wrote: 

> But I do know that the publisher has the complete right to 
> change whatever they want in the artwork.

How do writers and artists feel about this? Is it common practice with
other comics publishers? I know movie directors sometimes have the right
to the "last cut", which means the studio cannot dictate the final
version of the film. How about novels? Can a publisher rewrite whole
passages of a novel?  

> But when I read along with your conclusion I see that you have 
> made a mistake because from what I know it is the publisher that 
> remains the rights to the stories, but Disney owns the characters. 

So practically Gemstone pays royalties to Egmont (for the comics) and to
Disney (for using the characters in the stories)? If it is the publisher
who owns the copyrights to the stories, then the publisher should really
be the one to consider paying royalties for reprints to the creators.
Not Disney. 

> You also state that the cartoons are hot in America, but I have
> understood it totally opposite. 

Yes, sorry, I forgot a NOT here. What I meant was:

>> Especially considering the fact that (at least in the U.S.) Disney 
>> comics are NOT that hot a property that Disney could pick and choose
              ^^^ 

Cord









More information about the DCML mailing list