User talk:Crimsoncrusader

Welcome Crimsoncrusader to Public Domain Super Heroes. Thanks for your excellent sidekick contributions. I hope you enjoy your time here and keep those contributions coming.--Madmikeyd 00:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Uncle Sam
Uncle Sam does indeed appear in the American Spirit sketch. So do The Shield and Captain America (shadowed), who are neither Public Domain nor Project Superpowers characters. But ok, I'll go with it.--Madmikeyd 00:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Mini-series Catagories
My initial intent was for the "Project Superpowers" category to be all-inclusive of the PS universe. As the line grows, characters may get regulated to different titles (similar to Marvel having "X-Men characters" and "Spider-Man characters"), so I can see the argument for both ways. I'm inclined to leave it.--Madmikeyd 01:11, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Welcome tool
Hi, Crimsoncrusader! I saw the message that you left on User talk:Wikia, and I'm a little confused. Did you think that User:Wikia vandalized something? -- Danny (talk ) 17:14, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
I just wanted to thank you for double checking my work here. I'll try to be more mindful of the links and whatnot. I love this site and the idea behind it, and people like you make great. I, too, am looking at using some of these characters, and this site serves as an excellent reference.

Again, thanks.

--Raydog 02:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

What of this...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darna

Is she good for the taking in all countries except the Philippines?

Hello to a fellow editor
Hello, Crimson Crusader! I started on a project like this, but expanded it to all comics rather than just PD. I was hoping you'd come take a look and perhaps contribute if you like what you see. The site is at: http://popfiction.wetpaint.com Now, looking up Darna, I don't think she is PD, as Phillipine law allows for a copyright term of 50 years following the death of the author, and US law extends a term of 95 years for foreign works even if that work was not properly protected under US law. So, Darna would become PD in 2042 for the earliest works. However, as a clear derivation from Wonder Woman, it's unlikely the original author's claim to her would stand up in a US court...This is the maddening thing about PD, the details.

For instance, Uncle Sam and The Ray, et al. from Quality ARE PD. DC claims they own them, but the original works were never copyright renewed, so the characters are not owned. The confusion comes in about Plastic Man and Blackhawk, who did have some works renewed but not all, mostly early 1950's material. Also, Plas and Blackhawk are trademarked by DC, which is a different animal. Tarzan is PD as well, but trademarked by ERB Inc., people have used him, been sued, and there's no definitive answer as to wether he's in the clear.

A number of characters people beleive are copright protected, well, aren't. Sub-Mariner, isn't, as the first use was Motion Pictures Funnies Weekly, which is PD. Marvel Comics #1 was not renewed for copyright, which puts Namor, The Human Torch, The Angel and anyone else in that book initially, into PD. Note that Torch was renewed by Carl Burgos, but wether he has an existing estate is a question. Oh, yes, and the Nedor heroes were renewed and are under copyright, question is, to whom, and who exactly still cares? Might be the Pine family, might be CBS or AG Bertelsman or nobody. So, far, Dynamite and Project Superpowers has escaped any complications.

Hope to see you at Pop Fiction! http://popfiction.wetpaint.com - Fantasium 66.252.244.193 01:45, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Just out of curiosity, do you have any proof to back up those claims (especially the ones pertaining to Timely/Marvel and Nedor characters)? --Strannik01 18:22, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Moon Girl
MAD Magazine is all that remains of E.C., and Moon Girl hasn't seen a new publication in about 60 years. Admittedly, I've never read an explicit statement that she is in the public domain, but I believe it to be a pretty safe bet.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/36164.html

--AdamRavencroft 14:28, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Copyright Determination
Although I like this page, a lot! I think there's some confusion here about how copyright status and ownership works. There's no such thing as a copyrighted "character" in and of itself. Copyright, in the US, comes from protection of WORKS, or in most of these cases, stories. The way the law works for stories published before 1964 is, that the pubisher would have to register the work, then renew that registration 28 years later. If they don't, the characters in that work become public domain as they appear in THAT work only!

Take Moon Girl...She was first published in either Happy Houlihans #7 or Moon Girl #1, both out in 1947 and both published by EC Comics. I looked up copyright renewals for both 1974 and 1975 in the Catalog of Copyright Entries as found here: http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/cce/firstperiod.html

Since it does not appear to have been renewed, and was published by a corporation (EC), it can fairly safely be assumed that both books are in public domain. Therefore, Moon Girl is a "public domain character". However, let's say Max Gaines didn't renew number #1 of Moon Girl, but did renew number 2. You cannot use any elements unique to number 2, but you can use Moon girl herself as number 2 is a derivitive work of number 1. Searching public domain is not easy. This gets confusing.

There is also a controversy regarding the Quality Characters. (Doll Man, Uncle Sam, The Ray, etc.) becuase they were bought in the mid 1950's by DC Comics. All well and good for DC, however, when the renewals came up, they did not renew the works, making those characters public domain. Don Markstein at Toonopedia beleives DC owns these characters, but Bill Black at AC thinks they do not. Go figure. the Nedor characters (Black Terror, Fighting Yank and Doc Strange, etc.) WERE renewed, but no one has challenged Dynamite, ABC, I mage or anyone else who's used them, so either the ownership died with the demise of Pine Comics, or the Pines family still owns them or has sold them, and no owner has noticed the use. To early to tell. Most of those characters were actually created by Ben Sangor Studio, and bought by Pines Comics, so its possible Sangor owns them as well.

Happy Hunting! Pop by my wiki http://popfiction.wetpaint.com/ ---Fantasium 66.252.243.208 03:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Images
I see that several images you've uploaded have come from www.internationalhero.co.uk Same cropping, same image size, same yellowing, even same file names. That's my site, and you didn't ask. Yes, the characters might be public domain, but I put a lot of work into tracking down information and images for my site, and for you to come in and help yourself so you can build up another site, without even having the good grace to ask if it was okay, is incredibly rude. Please stop doing it. Not all your image additions have come from my site, so you are clearly capable of finding images without simply purloining them from other people. 86.136.186.218 20:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I have apologized and now gained permission to use images from the US Golden Age sections of www.internationalhero.co.uk. - Crimsoncrusader

Note on Quality Characters
Noticed you're working in Quality characters recently. Great! One thing I didn'tmake clear before, Plastic Man and Blackhawk ARE public domain. Yes, DC claims them, and may have "bought" them in 1956, but, the copyrights on most early works (issues) by Quality, including Military Comics and Police Comics were allowed to lapse. Also, The Spirit by Eisner should be public domain. This gets confusing...Quality published The Spirit in comics, and Everett Arnold arranged the comic strip (really a free comic) to be published in newspapers. Neither the syndicate nor Arnold nor Eisner ever renewed the copyright as far as I can tell, so Spirit should be PD. Eisner makes the claim (probably true) that he and Arnold had a reversion deal that returned ownership rights to him after the Spirit stoped appearing in Quality. However, even with such an agreement, the lack of renewal makes that deal moot. -Fantasium, popfiction.wetpaint.com 72.29.150.36 12:00, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * When the issue was covered at Comic Book Urban Legends Revealed, a commenter who called himself "Paul" stated at that he went to the Library of Congress and checked. According to his account, DC did renew copyright for Blackhawks and Plastic Man. As for the Spirit, I would air on the side of caution and assume that Eisner's copyright claim was legitimate. I think we can safely assume that most Quality Comics characters are in public domain because AC Comics and others reprinted the Golden Age stories they originally appeared in with nary a peep from DC Comics, but nobody tried to reprint GA Spirit stories without permission (I.W. Publishing's outright illegal reprints notwithstanding). --Strannik01 18:18, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Strannik01 - I looked this up personally, using the Catalog of Copyright Renewals for both 1941 and 1942. only a few issues of Plastic Man and Blackhawk stories were renewed, and those were for about 1954 to 1956, just following Arnold's death, when his widow was handling Quality. You can find this information here: http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/cce/firstperiod.html


 * Police Comics #1, the first appearance of Plas, WAS NOT renewed, meaning that while certain stories are protected, Plastic Man as a character is not. If Plastic Man was renewed and somehow I missed it, then Phantom Lady, The Human Bomb and The Mouthpeice, all debuting in Police #1, are owned by DC, which is not the case. The reason no one reprints Plastic Man or Blackhawk is that they ARE trademarked by DC. The trademark itself is questionable, as no one in the general public associates those characters exclusively with DC.


 * As for The Spirit and Eisner's claim, The Spirit Section would have had to have been renewed as part of the newspapers it appeared in for copyright as a work to be validated, and it is almost certain that did not happen. While I have great respect for Eisner, he does not own the character that I can tell. 72.29.154.125 07:28, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Alan Moore's Favorite
Did you know that Herbie Popnecker is Alan Moore's favorite superhero?

Yes, We should add this to his page in the notes section. It is a fun fact. - Crimsoncrusader

Category: Dynamite Entertainment
Do you know how to correct the spelling of the Dynamite Entertainment category? I know that it's (at least) linked from Dracula and S. Holmes.

Thanks for the help.

Guidelines
Have someone on this wiki written some kind of guideline for what to include on this wiki? For example, do you consider these additions in line with the "vision" for this wiki:


 * I’ve added the category the lost girls, complete with its three protagonists. The reason for this is primarily because it later on made Allan Moore write another shared universe – the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen – and thus has some kind of connection to the super-heroic world.


 * I’ve also added the category the House of Mouse. It is, most definitely, not a super-heroic world, but it is full of characters in the public domain. Some of these characters – like Hercules – have already been added in other categories, but there might be other public domain characters that might be of interest.

--Ifrippe 12:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, I totally agree with it. --Ifrippe 18:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Collaboration of The Week
On the front page there is a header called "Collaboration of The Week." Is the intention to make each character entry look more akin to how they look on sites like Wikipedia? If so, is there are guideline for how they should look.

If there isn’t a pre-made guideline, is it okay if I give Boy King a Wikipedia:ish look, that you could comment on?

--Ifrippe 15:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Merging characters
Don’t you think it would be better (as in easier to find characters when the wiki grows) if we merge characters that are just a different version on an established character, and instead have the deviant information under for each relevant publisher? The characters that I primarily think of are Flame, Frankenstein, Phantom Lady, Samson and Uncle Sam.

--Ifrippe 15:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Only problem with that is some of the details of the characters get change with different versions. For example The Flame(1) could control fire and got his powers from magic. The Flame (2) was a scientist and did not control fire. I know that when dealing with PD characters you have to be specific. --Rivalmoon 04:22, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Main page
Hi! I was just looking at the wiki, and I was wondering why there's that big blank space at the top of the main page. Did you mean to do that? -- Danny (talk ) 00:45, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I think I fixed it. Sometimes these things seem to have a mind of their own...--Madmikeyd 00:55, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank You
These are my first few pages of any type. I just wanted to thank you for your help in making them look better. I have a bit of trouble with the infoboxes.

--Rivalmoon 02:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem - Crimsoncrusader

Questionable Status
My concern is that we add characters like the Shield, the Web, the Fly or whoever and someone uses them saying they were on our site so they must be public domain, then gets sued. I know the majority of MLJ books are PD (including early Archie stuff), but I don't know the ins and outs of what characters are protected to what degrees. I trust your judgement, however (probably more than mine). If you reasonably believe lower-profile characters to be PD I'll go with it.

As far as I know those characters are NOT public domain and were trademarked in a deal with DC which did the Impact comics with them and are relaunching them now. --Rivalmoon 04:11, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

--With regards to not only the MLJ Characters, but characters in general, here are a few rules of thumb:

1.) Trademarking does NOT grant copyright protection. Trademarking a PD character only protects it to the degree of its "distinctive likeness" for marketing purposes. For example, if I publish Santa Claus Comics #1, that does not mean you cannot use the character of Santa, it means you may not create a title with the same name and you may not "pass off" your comic as my company's work. Trademark only lasts as long as as one uses a character for product identity, but does not run out. Trademarks are rather specific. "Superman" is a trademark of DC Comics, "Man with Red Cape", probably is not.

2.) Copyright only exists where a creator or rightsholder has met the legal requirements for such protection. Today, that's easy, create a fixed work, such as a story or drawing, you own it. Back before the 1970's, there were renewals, publishing notices, etc. Either a company or creator maintained these, or they didn't. It really doesn't matter who bought what, or who's using what character in which book, specific characters are protected or they aren't. What I've found using records from Guttenberg Project (Catalog of Copyright Renewals) or the US Copyright Office or other databases is, that DC was meticulous about renewal, Marvel is tough to pin down, Facwett is hit and miss with some Captain Marvel stuff protected, some not, Gleason is in PD, MLJ is PD on early work, Nedor is protected but may not exist as a rightsholder, and other companies just may not care about 1940's work, like Avon. Quality was initally protected, but most of it was allowed to lapse, despite the DC "purchase".

3.) While lapsed works are PD, including all characters and plot details, works based on these are not. While Mary Shelly's novel Frankenstein is PD, the Universal Studios Frankstein film, including what everyone "knows" Frankenstein's Monster looks like, is protected. The latter are "derivative works" and are protected as a unique expression of the creator. Also, this means that if I want to use Lev Gleason's Daredevil as seen in in a comic printed by him, that's ok, but I may not use anything unique to Dynamite's Project Superpowers, unless I use it as a "transformative work", such as in an encyclopeida or as humor or in a review.

4.) In Trademark, there's such as thing as "genericide", meaning that once unique tradenames, used by the general public as a regular word or term for a product, is no longer a a legitimate trademark. Aluminum Foil , Kerosene and Asprin are examples of former trademarks, Google and Kleenex are dangerously close. "Genericide" might exist in relation to Copyright as well in some form, as "stock characters" or "stock plots" have no protection. This means that I may use a "butler" or "evil clown" in my story, but not specifically "Alfred Pennyworth" or "The Joker". DC snuffed out a few supers in the 1940's as violations of the Superman Copyright, as they were super-strong , flying crimefighters with capes. Today, the general public, when thinking about what a "superhero" is, think of super-strong, flying guys in capes. So, are most supers "violations" of a "unique expression", or are they generic "stock characters"? Most likely, the latter, in my layman's opinion.

72.29.150.139 17:16, 17 July 2009 (UTC)FantasiumPrime http://popfiction.wetpaint.com

Hey there. I was wondering how you found out that Kismet is now in the public domain. I was wondering if there's any particular source - I'd be very interested to hear! Please message me on my wall - thanks : )

Hey Crimsoncrusader - thanks for getting back to me. I'd be interested in hearing more about your ambition in the comicbook world. Do you have an email address I could contact you on?

why not open up a section where people can add ongoing interp of these characters. Leave the original bio that you have where people can't change it, but then open it up for interp.

Hey CC - I understand about the email address. I essentially wanted to talk to you about a new venture of bringing some of these characters back into the foreground. Given your experience, it would be good to have your input, possibly even your help. If it's something that might interest you, let me know.

Avenger
Hello,

The Avenger has been one of favortite PD characters since my teenage years.

I contacted AC publisher Bill Black (?) and asked about the Avenger being a PD character and that I was writing a project about the character and would there be any problem doing this since I didnt know where to turn or who to ask.

Mr. Black came back and told me that the Avenger character wasnt in public domain and I couldnt use the character. He wouldnt respond to my follow up questions as to why I couldnt use the character. I abandoned the project.

Can anyone tell why I couldnt use the original?? I couldnt find anything to indicate that the AC publisher had rights to the character.

Please let me know.

I really enjoy your sight and all the work that has been put into it.

Vince

Vince, there is no reason you cannot use the Magazine Enterprise Avenger to my knowledge. This because all of his Golden Age comics fell into the public domain when the company went failed to renew the comics in their 28th year which meant the characters fell into the public domain. Here http://www.geocities.com/cash_gorman/copyright1.html and Here http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/cce/firstperiod.html are research to support this. Also you can download Avenger's comics at Golden Age Comic Downloads. I hope this will help you and good luck with your project. - Crimsoncrusader

Vince- Bill Black maintains that Vin Sullivan (the owner) personally granted him the right to use all of Magazine Enterprises' characters for his AC Comics imprint. I have no reason to doubt Mr. Black's assertion, however, the lack of renewal on any comic means that the characters in it are public domain. Mr. Black also maintains he holds the trademark on all Magazine Ent's characters, including the Avenger. However, the Supereme Court said that Trademark cannot be used to limit use on PD material, so that trademark may not be enforcable. That's what Mr. Black meant when he said Avenger can't be used. --66.252.249.155 07:21, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Cameos or Full Appearances?
Hi Crimson. You seem to be the go-to person for questions so...Regarding characters at multiple companies, if a hero has made a brief cameo in, say, a DC book, is that enough reason to add a DC Characters category to their page? For instance, The Clock, Commando Yank, and Bozo the Iron Man all had cameos/references in Starman. They haven't officially appeared in any new DC stories though as far as I know. Thoughts? Rajah1 02:29, September 5, 2009 (UTC)

Stories
Is it okay to put one paragraph story summaries of a character's Golden Age appearances in their bios? Is that too much info?
 * [[Image:Roygbiv666.jpg|25px|link=User talk:Roygbiv666]] 20:30, September 11, 2009 (UTC)

If it was a significant story such as how they met their sidekick or how they got their powers I could see a paragraph being OK, but for less significant stories maybe a sentence or two would suffice. - Crimsoncrusader

FAQ
MUCH better than mine, thank you for putting that up. I was just sick of a blank FAQ and filled it in as best I could. ````

No problem, thanks for filling in the rest of the FAQ. You did a good job. - Crimsoncrusader

THANX!!

 * Hey, thanks very much for adding the categories and infoboxes, CC. Have followed your advice and added the extra information. Ciao, SimonKirby 01:52, September 15, 2009 (UTC)

No problem SimonKirby, Madmikeyd and I were happy to help. - Crimsoncrusader

Open Source
Is it possible for anyone to add an Open Source Character? Cause I have a couples of characters that I wouldn't mind opening up for public use. If I can, let me know.

User:SoundersSecretKeeper

Thanks
Thanks for the answer. I have to do a little more work on them but I think I can get them on the sight some time in the near future.

User:SoundersSecretKeeper

Sounds Good. - Crimsoncrusader

Imprints and sub-categories
I received this message from Ifrippe. You're a better "catagorizer," so what's your opinion? I defer to your judgement.--Madmikeyd 19:29, September 22, 2009 (UTC)

Original Message: To make the main characters page less cluttered, is it okay if I remove all imprints (provided that they have I link it the companies main page)?

For example, is it okay to remove the imprints Tem and Helnit, since they are already linked under Holyoke?

Here is how I see it. We should include all of them because they categorize different things. For example, Project Superpowers is one series and Black Terror is another monthly series while Dynamite is a publisher category. Tem and Helnit are imprint categories. It is like if you made a Wolverine page, he would fit in the Marvel, mutant, Avenger, and X-Men categories. You would not exclude one of these categories from his page. - Crimsoncrusader

RE: Dr Death & The Beyond
Hey CC. I’d like to add some more detailed information about the "universe" Dr. Death inhabits (Wikipedia has some additional info in their Haunted article). Would a description of the Beyond and some of its recurring characters be considered relevant enough to include in the Dr. Death article? Ciao, SimonKirby 08:49, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, in fact I would encourage you to create a page for the Beyond and categorize it as a location. - Crimsoncrusader

"Scoop" Newsletter
I just wanted to pass this on. You might have already seen this. We got mentioned in the Savvy Sites section of Gemstone's "Scoop" newsletter this week:

http://scoop.diamondgalleries.com/public/default.asp?t=1&m=1&c=34&s=268&ai=87280 --Madmikeyd 21:43, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

Raven's real name.
Hi, CC. When I clicked the link on Raven’s page to International Superheroes, they listed the character’s name as Danny Dartin. This made me curious, and I downloaded Sure-Fire Comics #1 and #3, and Lightning Comics v1 #4, v2 #1, and v2 #5 from the Golden Age Comics site. In all five of these the Raven’s real name is spelled Danny Dartin. Is it spelled Dartkin in Four Favorites? They don’t have any Raven issues on that site, so I don’t know. ````

I'm wondering that myself because every online source I can find spells it Dartkin. However if the comic spells it Dartin then let's change it to that. - Crimsoncrusader

n

The page has been change both here and on the Project Superpowers wiki to reflect the correct spelling. - Crimsoncrusder

Almost complete?
Do you believe this Wiki is nearing its completion?

--AdamRavencroft 22:37, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

No, there are many characters to still add especially villains and supporting cast members. I honestly do not think we will ever complete the wiki. So many characters so little time. - Crimsoncrusader

Good point. It took decades to create all these characters, and it might take just as long to discover them all.

Do the same copyright laws apply in Britain? I've noticed there are a lot of Golden Age British superheroes:

http://www.internationalhero.co.uk/40.htm

just to name a few. --AdamRavencroft 22:59, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

British copyright law is different from US copyright law here's a page about it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_Kingdom - Crimsoncrusader

Writing Style
Should we be writing these articles from the real world perspective, in-universe, or both? I would think both would be ideal.
 * [[Image:Roygbiv666.jpg|25px|link=User talk:Roygbiv666]] 01:39, November 11, 2009 (UTC)


 * Mostly in-universe, with real world perspective where appropriate. --Strannik01 02:41, November 11, 2009 (UTC)


 * Include real world perspective in the notes and in- universe in the main section. - Crimsoncrusader

American Folklore Characters articles
I am writing because I am not sure the articles about characters from American folklore that JEREMYSIDESHOW has been making fit our guidelines. I thought we decided that we weren't going to include mythological characters unless they appeared in public domain comics. None of the articles JEREMYSIDESHOW posted qualify. --Strannik01 01:30, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

I agree if the characters have appeared in comics then its fine, but if they've not then there is no point to add them to our wiki. However Pecos Bill, Paul Bunyan, and John Henry have made numerous comic appearances so I'm ok with those characters being on the wiki and have edited the pages to reflect this.- Crimsoncrusader


 * Fair enough --Strannik01 17:57, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Doctor Solar
Howdy. I've been vaguely familiar with the character Doctor Solar, Man of the Atom. I know he appeared during the Silver Age in Gold Key Comics. I don't know if he appeared in any other comic company during that time. The character later appeared in Valiant/Acclaim comics during the 1980's &1990's.

This character actually is a lot more like Dr. Manhattan from the Watchmen than any other but that's another issue.

The question I have is this: Is Dr. Solar as he appeared during the Silver Age in any of the Gold Key comics considered Public Domain? Also, is Dr. Solar another re-tooling of Capt. Atom? The only relevant info I could find is an explanation of his powers, which is great, but I don't have any other 4-1-1. Thanks for your help. Phantom of Doom 17:23, January 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * " Is Dr. Solar as he appeared during the Silver Age in any of the Gold Key comics considered Public Domain?"


 * No. All of Dr Solar's original appearances are still under copyright. --Strannik01 17:46, January 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * OK. Who owns the copyrights to Dr. Solar's Silver Age appearances?


 * Dark Horse is currently using Doctor Solar and are releasing a comic for free comic book day and will begin a new series in the summer of 2010. You can see the free comic book day info here. - :

Dr. Solar (Part deux)
OK. That is well and good and I feel like I'm beating a dead horse, but I've still not received an actual answer regarding who actually owns the character and whether or not he is Public Domain.

Does anyone know for a fact if Dark Horse bought the rights to Dr. Solar? Please forgive me for being so annoying about this topic. Not being rude by any means, please don't think it.

Again, I know Gold Key initially published the character during the Silver Age, don't know if any other companies like Dell picked it up, seems like I may have seen Dr. Solar in a Dell comic. I do know for a fact that Valiant/Acclaim did a brief run during the 1990's. However I believe Valiant went under, changed to Acclaim but Acclaim focused mainly on video games only did a few comics like Turok.

Having said all this I've done some reading up on Dr. Solar, and he is more similar to Dr. Manhattan than Capt.Atom, even his whole transformation from a human into an energy being, affecting other humans with his radioactivity, even the symbol on his forehead! However is it possible Dr. Solar was a re-tooling of Capt. Atom?

Who acquired the Dr. Solar copyrights? Even though Dark Horse is publishing a new series, it doesn't necessarily mean they own the copyrights, does it?

Not trying to be a pest, I am just very curious about this character and I've not been able to find much info about the character at all.

Thank you for providing the link to the Dark Horse site. Phantom of Doom 00:05, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Random House currently owns the copyright (because it acquired Western Publishing, the previous owner, back in late 90s) Strannik01 03:50, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Here's a link to the US copyright office showing renewal. - Crimsoncrusader 04:28, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank You! Phantom of Doom 05:14, January 30, 2010 (UTC)

Editing or deleting articles
Is here a way to edit an article name or delete it altogether? I'm trying to seperate the "13 and Jinx" article into 2 sperate articles but I'm having some trouble. Thanks!

Best thing to do would be to rename the original article 13 or Jinx and then create a new article named for the other character. Crimsoncrusader 00:01, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Miguel Rude's Question
dear as we say in the brazil: "your page is a discovery" I liked your idea a lot : of catalog and collection and search & research. I thought about putting my free character UP TO 2009, after 2010 the one that I made the people could not use. but I see that I wandered for not knowing of the rules and I wandered for not knowing to "edit of the way wikia"

Glad you have enjoyed the site and feel free to add your character to the site. If you need any help with anything feel free to ask. Crimsoncrusader 03:07, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

This Is Very Good
thank you very mutch!

then I send the cover of the bio47 N° 2

Cool I'll add it to the page. Crimsoncrusader 03:32, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

laws and permissions
if us artists of the Brazil we made an encounter between cabal and black terror or Boy King & Giant us Brazilian we would have permission? is there some law without your country that doesn't leave that to happen?

i wait for answers

thanks.


 * They are public domain. Use them any way you like. No permission is necussary. Strannik01 03:44, March 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep since their public domain in the United States, their country of origin, then they should be fine for you to use in Brazil. Crimsoncrusader 04:10, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

thank you very much for the answers then await future innovations

excelsior!

Free Universe and Creating a Comunity
Hi there Crimson. I really love what all of your guys are doing here on this wiki. It's amazing. I am the guy who created the "Free Universe" site (universe.1free.ws). I realize this may seem like a competing site, but actually it was intended to be complimentary. I wanted to be able to do something slightly different than what you were doing here. Here you are preserving the characters as they were. I felt that there was an impending threat of people claiming intuitive revision of characters on their own, and I wanted to stake out some revision territory that I could donate to the public domain. After all, there are only so many ways you can revise Black Terror or Captain Battle, before people run out of ways to distinguish their versions. With my site, there is at least one revision you can always use. You may have already understod all that, but I thought I'd explain. A lot of the information on my character profiles, comes from scrutinizing the comics and focusing on a character, a little more than the mass number of profiles on these sites. But I've also filled in the holes in a few places. I saw that you based the "White Killer" profile here on my profile, because you listed his real name as "Tom" Fredericks. The first name of that character was one of those holes that I filled in. He didn't have a first name. But, it's okay, because I intend that data...that "idea" to be public domain. But of course, you probably don't want people making up stuff like that on this site, which is why I built my own. You are free to use any of my made up information, but if you're trying to keep it true to only the original source, my info is sometimes a little "tainted" with made up stuff. But trust me, if White Killer showed up in the next billion dollar Batman movie with the name Tom, I would just laugh (oh, and by the way, he was called "White Terror" on the comic's cover, so that wasn't made up).

Anyway, there is another major reason why I built my own site....I REALLY wanted to communicate with people like you. When I first came to this wiki, I was EXTREMELY frustrated that I didn't know how to contact anyone, to ask questions or share ideas. I am still only just getting used to this whole "wiki" thing, and I have only recently discovered these "talk" pages as a means of communication. And frankly....I find the talk pages a little disjointed and hard to follow.

That is why I created a forum on my site. I think it's a much easier way for people like us to communicate, exchange ideas and answer questions for people who don't know much about copyright and trademark laws. Unfortunately, my newly created forums are deserted. I've been trying to promote my site, but nobody has joined the forums. I think they would be EXTREMELY useful in our endeavors. So here is what I am proposing:

If you would be willing to put a link to my forums on this site, I'd be happy to make it a joint PDSH wiki / Free Universe forum, and add any administrators here, to the administration of the forum. This would give us a place to talk about a whole range of issues and possibly foster a new community of creators who are willing to provide new characters to the ranks of the freely licensed. it would also allow us to put questions out there to a whole community instead of just one person like I'm doing now. Would you consider this a worthy pursuit?


 * First, I'd like to say I also enjoyed your sit*e and look forward to seeing it grow. Second, thank you for giving me this info about the White Killer page. I don't have the comic so I could not check which info was from Free Universe and what was Golden Age. Also, we'll try and keep any free universe info on your site or on a separate page so readers know where the information comes from. And yes the talk page can be sometimes hard to follow, but I'm glad you found a way to communicate with us. Finally, I agree that creating a joint forum would be a beneficial and I would be happy to be a forum admin. I would ask the other admins though and see what they think. Crimsoncrusader 21:46, April 2, 2010 (UTC)

Holy crap!
So, I just found out that apparently the THUNDER Agents are public domain after all. The whole convoluted story is in this post by John Colag, who seems to generally know his copyright law. (Short version: the copyright notice on THUNDER Agents #1 was not legible enough and in the wrong place, and John Carbonaro was full of it.)

I knew it! Nice find KnightRandom. I will re-enstate the Thunder Agents page and we can begin work on adding other Tower characters. We need to be sure and add this info to the respective pages. Crimsoncrusader 05:24, April 11, 2010 (UTC)

T.H.U.N.D.E.R. Agents
Hi, I'm one of Wikia's Community Support team. We had an email about the T.H.U.N.D.E.R. Agents article, saying that the characters are not in the public domain. Reading around, it seems this is a controversial question, but Wikipedia concludes that the second lawsuit was settled "with Singer acknowledging Carbonaro’s registered copyrights and trademark." So maybe the articles shouldn't be in this wiki?

This is looking a great project by the way, nice work! -- sannse (talk) 02:23, April 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * I would be interested in why the e-mail claimed it was protected under copyright. My guess is the sender did not reasearch copyright law very thoroughly. 1923-1977 all publications had to include a proper copyright notice which had to be clearly visible, correctly written, and in the proper location. Only the first issue had a notice, but it was not clearly visible nor in the correct place on the book so the book became public domain on publication.

Crimsoncrusader 04:29, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

The sender's view, as I understand it, is that the lawsuit settled the disagreements on the copyright status, and that Singer's later account isn't accurate. But I don't know all the details, just what I've read after getting the mail. I'm happy in this case just to pass on the comments, and leave the decision on the articles to you - this seems to be an argument on the facts rather than an actual copyright complaint -- sannse (talk) 18:09, April 29, 2010 (UTC)

According to DC Comics, John Carbonaro owned the rights to the THUNDER Agents, since they purchased them from his estate and plan on putting out a new THUNDER Agents comic this year. I do believe I would trust DC Comics to know if they were PD characters. THey wouldn't waste the money on characters they could use anyway.

Carbonaro bought the characters from the legal owners after the demise of Tower Comics.

Actually DC has been known to spend money buying characters that are public domain a lot. All most all of the Quality, Fawcett, and Charlton characters they claim to own never had proper copyrights to begin with either failing to be renewed 28 years after their publications or having improper copyright notices. Plus, the characters they are licensing from Archie are almost all public domain except for those who originated after the Golden Age. I invite you to explore our site more and read the FAQ to learn more about why these characters are in the public domain.

As for the THUNDER AGENTS while Carbonaro believed he bought the copyrights he did not because Tower Comics never included a proper copyright notice on their books. Any work published between 1923-1977 that did not include a proper copyright notice was made public domain upon publication. However, Carbonaro's estate does own the rights to the subsequent books produced after he "acquired" the characters. 00:54, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Hey man,

Just wanted to say thanks for the welcome! AlgeaX 14:46, April 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * Just so you know, welcome messages are auto-generated, so CrimsonCrusader didn't actually welcome you - though I'm sure he appreciates your comment :) --Strannik01 14:08, April 30, 2010 (UTC)

Infoboxes
Hey man thanks for the hand on the Frankenstein's Monster page. I was wondering if you could tell me how to make infoboxes? -- AlgeaX 23:31, April 29, 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I would just go to an existing page with and infobox and when in the editing mode hit the source button and copy the infobox format from there and save it into a Word document so you could access it any time you wanted to make a page. 00:24, April 30, 2010 (UTC)

Cheers dude -- AlgeaX 20:37, May 4, 2010 (UTC)

Message from David M. Singer
David M. Singer is an acquaintance of mine and since he's not saavy on how to post messages on these kinds of forums, he asked me to post the following message for him:

“I have recently posted comments regarding the copyright status of the T.H.U.N.D.E.R. Agents as public domain characters. My comments were incorrect. I must make the following clarification: John Carbonaro and David Singer, Singer Publishing Company, Inc. and Deluxe Comics, have reached a final settlement in the lawsuit between the parties (entitled John Carbonaro, et. al. v. David Singer, et. al., 84 Civ. 8737 (S.D.N.Y.)). Singer acknowledges Carbonaro’s registered copyrights and trademark in the “T.H.U.N.D.E.R. Agents®” and has consented to be permanently enjoined from utilizing any of the “T.H.U.N.D.E.R. Agents” characters, stories or artwork or Carbonaro’s trademark. Under the settlement, Carbonaro will receive, among other things, an assignment of all rights to “Wally Woods T.H.U.N.D.E.R. Agents,” previously published by Singer."

Thank you for bring this our attention. Our research has shown that there is sufficient backing with in the copyright law to prove that first issue of T.H.U.N.D.E.R. Agents is public domain because while there is a copyright notice it is incorrectly placed. Also every issue from #2-20 does not have any notice anywhere in the book making those public domain as well. However, I will remove links to Mr. Singer's original post and add a note about the trademark status and Singer's “Wally Woods T.H.U.N.D.E.R. Agents.” Crimsoncrusader 22:52, May 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * Would it be better to retain the old links and preface them with a note that the information is contested? that way we keep all the info and note there's disagreement?
 * Roygbiv666 Sig 001.png 20:33, May 23, 2010 (UTC)

Open Source locations/universe?
I was wondering if it would be okay to add open source locations and/or universes in a manner similar to Marvel's or DC's multiverses. For universes I would try to build a history & assign some pd characters to them (noting any particular quirks for these particular versions).Yzz, Master of DOOM 02:04, May 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * That would be really cool go ahead and add any locations you would like. Look forward to seeing them later. Crimsoncrusader 04:03, May 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep in mind, though, that you can't make stuff up for existing comic book public domain characters. With Golden Age and Silver Age PD characters, we aim to keep our articles as historically accurate as possible --Strannik01 04:54, May 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * I wasn't talking about changing the actual character pages, just listing changes from the original character for a particular universe. For example, on Earth-Z there is a version of the Super-American who is a borderline fascist. On the Earth-Z page, I would provide a link to the real, unaltered Super-American entry, with a note under the link explaining that on Earth-Z he's a fascist. Sounds good?Yzz, Master of DOOM 14:49, May 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not sure what would be the point of making this sort of thing open source, but what you're describing isn't against the rules, so knock yourself out. --Strannik01 15:32, May 23, 2010 (UTC)

License
What is the license used in open source characters? I'm part of Wikipedia and would like to post some images on the Wikimedia Commons.Hyju 17:34, May 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Personally, I don't see why not. Post away. --Strannik01 00:56, May 28, 2010 (UTC)

I believe the images themselves have been declared public domain by their creators. As for the license, its on each character's respective page. Crimsoncrusader 22:52, May 28, 2010 (UTC)

there could be a warning in the pages of images. Example:.Hyju 00:39, May 30, 2010 (UTC)

Hello/Open Source
Hi CC! Love this wiki! Was checking out the Open Source Category. The required paragraph reads "all rights reversed". Shouldn't that be "all rights reserved"? Would've changed it myself, but for all I know it could be the former!:)CadmiumX99 19:31, June 3, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd ask MadMikeyD since he was the first one to add Open Source Characters to the wiki. I have never added any. Crimsoncrusader 20:00, June 3, 2010 (UTC)


 * When Strannik01 had changed "reversed" to "reserved" (becuase I had used one of the other open-source licenses on the wiki as a template), he later reverted it, saying: " I has just been informed by a reliable source that it really was supposed to say "reversed." Sorry about that. My bad. " So... As an aside, if you use any of the stuff I made, could please tell me about it? I'm curious as to which directions others may take the material toward.
 * Please make sure to voice your opinion on the wiki policy vote.Yzz, Master of DOOM 22:48, June 3, 2010 (UTC)


 * CadmiumX99: Here is the deal. "All rights reserved" signifies that you reserve all rights to the material. But if you write "all rights reversed," the opposite happens - you signify that you renounced any and all exclusive rights to the material and released it into public domain as an open-source character/concept --Strannik01 00:12, June 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks Strannik! Sounds logical to me, glad I asked! Would something like "all rights renounced" be less confusing?CadmiumX99 07:20, June 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * "All rights reversed" is a legal concept. "all rights renounced" would be more of a legal statement, but either one should work. --Strannik01 07:25, June 19, 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the Outcome Wiki policy vote
Well, Crimsoncrusader, it seems that most of the members have voted, and the vote is in your favor. I am not sure that letting the vote go on will make much of difference. Personally, I still think that putting pulp and literary characters (that don't have Golden Age comic book counterparts) is a good idea, but since the vote has gone in your favor, the ball is in your court. --Strannik01 15:27, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

The Spirit?
is "the spirit" public domain? because I have a college book project due in a week that may be published and he's in there.--FossilLord 03:28, June 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * There's no record of renewal for the Spirit Sections, The Spirit Quality Comics series, or the stories featured in Smash or Police. However, only the original Golden Age content would be public domain and there is a good chance that DC or the Eisner heirs will sue if they discover unauthorized use of the Spirit regardless of his legal status. Crimsoncrusader 03:46, June 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think you may be able to get away with reprinting original Golden Age material, but that's a big if. Of course, personally, I am opposed to using the Spirit at all on moral grounds, since the character was one of the very few instances when the comic book creator kept the ownership of his property, and I want to respect that.. But that's just me. And, as Crimsoncrusader rightfully noted, you probably wouldn't get away with creating original Spirit material without getting sued by Eisner's heirs. --Strannik01 04:13, June 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * The world i am working on is kind of pulp fiction and i was thinking of combining him with the clock but i'll just focus on the clock. I needed a character to "inspire" my other heroes.--FossilLord 00:35, June 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * You could always use Midnight ;) --Strannik01 02:13, June 27, 2010 (UTC)

Strannik01's right Midnight would be a great choice since he was created to replace the Spirit during the war. Crimsoncrusader 02:35, June 27, 2010 (UTC)

I got an A but its not being printed as and i quote "Superheros are childish" and the guys favorite movie is watchmen, also midnight is a good idea for version 2.0--FossilLord 02:23, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Spammer alert.
User:Wayne39hodge added spam to the front page (for "universal translation service" or somesuch). I already removed it but just FYI.--Yzz, Master of DOOM 14:39, July 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Blocked his IP address and account. Thanks for the heads up. --Strannik01 15:29, July 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks Yzz good looking out. Crimsoncrusader 01:06, July 29, 2010 (UTC)

The Bat
Do you know if this character is in The Public Domain? I've looked around and the only place that seems to have info on this character is the Golden Age Hero Directory.Here is a link to his picture.

The Bat's copyright situation is complicated. First he's a British comic book character so he falls under UK Copyright law which is different than US Copyright law. According to UK law published work becomes public domain 70 years after the death of the author even if the work was produced as work for hire. Bat's creator was George McQueen, his publisher was Cartoon Art Productions, and supposedly made his first appearance in 1949. I do not know if McQueen is still alive, but the character hasn't been used in 61 years meaning it could be an orphan work. Most likely there would be no obstacles in using the character, but you take the risk of legal actions if it isn't abandoned. Here's more info on the character. Crimsoncrusader 02:27, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks man.

Determination of PD status and inclusion
Hi Crimson - I used to communicate with you here regarding which characters were or were not PD, and got discouraged because you seemed overly cautious at the time. (Plastic Man, Blackhawks, etc) I now see Plas has a page and you all are creating notes regarding which books were renewed, which is good. I hope to see Captain Marvel and co. here soon, as well as some others. Some of the Charlton stuff has the same issues as T.H.U.N.D.E.R. Agents, incorrect or missing copyright notices. I don't want anyone to get into trouble, but I also don't like big corporations locking up characters they didn't create and don't own. Did you know, for instance that CBS, NOT DC, created Jimmy Olsen? The research does take time to get clear, of course, and requires hard work. I wish you the best. --KRyan

This aught to blow your mind, as far as who created what -- http://www.dialbforblog.com/archives/389/

We're working on getting more characters who are public domain, but who are being claimed by big companies incorrectly. Of course we've been trying to include sufficient warning to the risks involved with creating a new work featuring this character, but if someone doesn't shed light on the situation then we deprive the world of great characters and creative potential. More Charlton on the way and just finished a major bit of research on the status of of nearly every Marvel Family character so look for those in the future. Interesting Olsen was created by CBS, but radio copyright is complicated. The recording weren't renewed but the scripts can still be protected by copyright such as Green Hornet. Will have to read the article in detail later, but thanks for passing on the link. Crimsoncrusader 04:38, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

Detective Eye
Do you happen to have any digital copies of this character's appearances? I noticed you uploaded the image, but with the new wiki layout (hate it) I have no idea how to look at the article history to see who provided the info.
 * Roygbiv666 Sig 001.png 21:08, October 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops, found it, sorry.


 * By the way Roy if you go into your preferences you can switch to the old look by selecting Monaco. Crimsoncrusader 02:13, October 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Stranik01 told me the same. Change bad. ;-)
 * Roygbiv666

Adding a character
Hi there

I have enjoyed reading through the various characters on this site and I have ideas for writing some stories based on some of the open source material.

I have a character that I would like to add. I just have the style of the character and the name - everything else such as a back ground etc needs moulded.

What would be the best way to go about this? Would other users be interested in adding to the character?

Transmooky 08:31, November 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think you need to make at least some bare-bones background. Don't see why others can't flash out the details. --Strannik01 08:35, November 21, 2010 (UTC)

Email to Wikia
Hi, I had an email to say that characters from "All-Negro Comics Inc" are not in the public domain. Please can you check and correct if necessary? Thanks, -- Sannse (help forum | blog) 18:01, December 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * Looking over all the documentation I can't find any sign of All-Negro Comics #1 being renewed 28 years after publication (originally published in 1947 it would have had to be renewed in 1975) which was required by US copyright law to secure copyright for another 95 years which is why the characters were added in the first place.


 * Here and here are the first copyright renewals list and the US copyright office records which show no renewal on both sites. Was there any reasoning behind why these characters were still under copyright in the e-mail because everything seems to be in order with US law placing it into the public domain. Crimsoncrusader 00:36, December 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * From what I've been able to gather, the estate of Orrin C. Evans, the publisher of All-Negro Comics, claimed copyrights and trademark rights for those characters as of 2003. Now, whether they have a legitimate claim or not is another question entirely. --Strannik01 04:18, December 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * They probably didn't know about renewal being necessary to keep their copyright back then and still think they own the characters. That's to bad for them, but at least being in the public domain will give the character much greater exposure and potential to be printed again. 05:05, December 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * There weren't any details, so I just passed the comment on :) It wasn't a takedown notice (I'm sure you know how that works) -- so all's good for now -- Sannse (help forum | blog) 13:05, December 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * Cool thanks for passing the info along. Crimsoncrusader 23:32, December 24, 2010 (UTC)

I just wanted to bring your attention to the message Tom Christopher left in the Ace Harlem article. I moved it to the article's talk page. I wanted to run it by you before writing a response. --Strannik01 19:35, January 24, 2011 (UTC)

New Companion Wiki
So, I decided to start building something we talked about before - a wiki dedicated to public domain characters that don't fit our definition of "superheroes" - non-superhero funny animals, teen characters in the Archie mold, non-superhero comedy strips. It's very, very barebones right now, and I want it to have some content before we properly unveil it on this wiki. You can see it here. Strannik01 17:30, January 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * Cool thanks for putting that up man. I'll be sure to come over and give you a hand with it. Crimsoncrusader 01:40, January 15, 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I appreciate any help you can give me. --Strannik01 03:06, January 15, 2011 (UTC)

Help for heroes inc wiki
I doubt that you are aware of this but the web comic heroes inc has a wiki. A wiki that I am in the process of editing I was wondering if it is possible to copy all the information in the heroes inc charecters catogory and transfer it over to the heroes inc wiki? Please respond on my talk page when able thank you for your time.--User:FossilLord 03:55, January 21, 2011 (UTC)

Ditto what Strannik01 already posted. Crimsoncrusader 02:26, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

HEROES DOMAIN
I Have some questions:

1.Will More public domain golden age golden age characters appear in heroes domain anytime soon?

2.Will The heroes domain blog be updated soon?

3.Will There be a print version of heroes domain?Golden one 01:59, February 2, 2011 (UTC)allen c.trembone

Glad to see some interest in Heroes Domain. Thanks. I'll answer some of your questions as best as I can without too many spoilers.

1. Yes, I plan on including almost every public domain character into the Heroes Domain universe. Look for several Nedor heroes and several villains from multiple companies in the first issue. Look for more art and a Daredevil public service announcement mini- comic on the blog soon.

2. The blog will be updated soon. I've been doing a lot of behind the scenes work on the series, but other responsibilities have prevented me from updating as often as I would have liked.

3. Yes the print version of the first 22 page issue which is drawn and currently being lettered, colored, and prepared for print will hopefully be available this spring and will be sold online and at my booth at upcoming comic cons like Summit City and Mid-Ohio con. I also hope to have some with me at C2E2 but I will not have a booth there so people will have to find me at the con and ask for an issue.

Crimsoncrusader 20:47, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

I Have more questions:

5.Will there be original characters in heroes domain?

6.Will there be a heroes domain wikia page?

7.Will there be a heroes domain RPG?Golden one 22:27, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

And here are some more answers: 5. Yes I have created many original characters for the Heroes Domain universe, but many of those charatcers will show up later in the story when its progresses beyond the 40s and 50s.

6. There is a category page but Heroes Domain does not really need its own page on this wiki beyond that sicne this site is focused on providing info on the public domain not derivitatve works. Heroes Domain would eventually need its own wiki when its further along.

7. No plans for an RPG right now. Need to focus on making more story and art for the series before I diversify into to many other projects. Crimsoncrusader 00:00, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

Projects Featuring Public Domain Golden Age Characters
If I do a project of my own, featuring re-designed public domain golden age characters, should I include redesigned versions of the Fawcett and Archie/MLJ characters?Golden one 02:40, February 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Golden One, I'm guessing what your really is asking is if I use these characters in my project will DC or Archie sue me? This could happen and could not happen, but mainly a lawsuit would occur if you infringed on trademark or were using the characters in a controversial manner that would draw negative attention. The more well known the character the more likely as well. Captain Marvel and his Family or any superhero used in the Silver Age by Archie would be more likely to get you in trouble than using character who haven't been touched since the golden age or are obscure.


 * So my question is which characters would you be leaning towards and how would you be using them? Crimsoncrusader 20:26, February 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Here are the characters i would be leaning towards: the black hood,black jack,bob phantom,captain flag,

fireball,firefly,the fox,the hangman,inferno,mr.justice,the shield,steel sterling,the web,the wizard,bulletman,bulletgirl,commando yank,the phantom eagle,pinky,ibis the invincible,spy smasher,mr.scarlet,and captain midnight. I Would use them in my own stories with other public domain and original golden age characters.as redeigned characters.Golden one 21:37, February 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Most these should be fine, but be sure to read all the legal notes on their respective pages. Captain Midnight needs to used under a different name and any Mighty Crusader member might also want a name change just to be on the safe side. However since your re-designing the characters and using original one with them you should be ok. Crimsoncrusader 00:00, February 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * OK,Thank you very much for the advice,I Will re-design and rename captain midnight,


 * However,I have some questions:


 * 1.Which mighty crusader members should i give name changes?


 * 2.Which characters should be fine?Golden one 01:53, February 4, 2011 (UTC)


 * 1/2. Shield, Hangman, Inferno, and Web would be ones I would re-name to avoid trademark issues with DC/Archie. the other MLJ heroes should be ok.


 * Thank you,however,i have one question:which other MLJ Heroes should be ok?Golden one 23:24,

February 4, 2011 (UTC)


 * black hood,black jack,bob phantom,captain flag,

fireball,firefly,the fox,mr.justice,steel sterling,the wizard. Crimsoncrusader 14:17, February 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * thanks,since the other MLJ Heroes should be ok,should i use their actual names?


 * Also,which fawcett heroes should i use?Golden one 20:57, February 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * All of the Fawcett Heroes you listed above should be fine. The ones to avoid would be the Marvel Family if your concerned with potential trademark lawsuits. The MLJ names should be fine for the above listed characters. 71.97.209.7 22:52, February 6, 2011 (UTC)


 * Another issue with Marvel Family characters is that lots of their early Golden Age appearances are still under copyright, so you should be careful with which stories and characters you use. --Strannik01 04:54, February 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * OK,Thanks for the advice,I Will re-name captain midnight,the web,the shield,inferno,and the hangman,and use them and the other MLJ and fawcett characters in my stories,in their classic forms,just to be on the safe side,with the exception of the marvel family.Golden one 03:25, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

FIRST ISSUE OF HEROES DOMAIN
Will the first issue of heroes domain be available on indy planet?Golden one 01:56, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Hopefully, if not Indyplanet then another digital comics store like graphicly or my digital comics. Crimsoncrusader 21:32, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

OK,Thank you,I have another question,however:Will the first issue of heroes domain also be available through regular mail?Golden one 23:23, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

Maybe, I don't really know yet I need to finish the book before I worry to much about how I gonna to sell it. Don't count your chickens before they hatch right? Crimsoncrusader 14:18, February 5, 2011 (UTC)

FIRST THREE PAGES OF HEROES DOMAIN
I Saw the First three pages of heroes domain on your blog,and they are totally awesome,keep up the good work!01:44, February 4, 2011 (UTC)Golden one Thank you. I hopefully will be able to post more pages soon once I get a chance. Crimsoncrusader 21:34, February 4, 2011 (UTC)

archie/mlj heroes
Will the original golden age archie/mlj heroes appear in heroes domain?Golden one 21:08, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

Hopefully. Crimsoncrusader 21:24, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

more heroes domain questions
I Have some questions:

1.Which other characters will appear in the first issue of heroes domain?

A. Heroes: Blue Beetle, Owl, Bulletman, Green Lama, Black Terror, Miss Masque, Captain Future, Sparky, Bulletgirl, Owl Girl, Deacon, Hale of the Herald, and Spectro. Daredevil and the Little Wiseguys appear in a second feature.

Villains: Captain Nazi, Rodent, Wolf Carson, Nazi Beetle, Nazi Shock Gibson, Hitler, and Gluttony (an original villain who fights Daredevil.)

2.How can i order the first issue of heroes domain through regular mail once it's published?

A. Will let you know when I know.

3.What is the release Date?

A. June 2011. Crimsoncrusader 02:28, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Golden one 21:24, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

Wow,That is quite a line up,

However,I Have one more question:

Will any quality heroes appear in heroes domain after that?

Sure but I don't want to giveaway too much. Also some of those characters in issue #1 are cameos though. Crimsoncrusader 16:44, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

Quality Question
If I do a project featuring the quality characters, which ones should i use?

One listed hereare diffidently in the clear. Refer to the FAQ for more help. Crimsoncrusader 02:30, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

OK,Thank you for telling me,however,

I Have one question:

Can You Please

Name the quality characters I should use?

So are you asking for recommendations then? Sorry thought you were asking about their legal status. Some good ones might be Uncle Sam (Quality),Doll Man, The Human Bomb, Ray, Human Condor, and Phantom Lady. Also, Kid Eternity, Captain Triumph, Wildfire, Firebrand, Red Bee, Raven, Spider Widow, and etc. There no list of should use really as long as their all public domain its all personal choice really. Pick what ones you like. All of the ones here are listed on this page Crimsoncrusader 16:44, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

I Am picking all of them!Golden one 22:21, March 29, 2011 (UTC)

Original Villains
I Am interested in creating original villains for the public domain golden age heroes. Golden one 03:14, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Cool go for it. Were you thinking about making them open source and adding them to the site or are you just sharing a new project that you want to tackle? Crimsoncrusader 17:50, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

I Am Just Sharing A New Project That I Want to tackle.

Thanks for asking.Golden one 11:58, March 30, 2011 (UTC)

Heroes I Would like to see in heroes domain
Here are the following heroes i would like to see in heroes domain:

Commando yank,the wizard,the shield,the hangman,uncle sam(quality),firebrand,the woman in red,both magnos,spider widow,the spider,amazing man,the clock,black jack,the flame,lash lightning,the black hood,the web,davey,the american crusader,skyman,the spider,miss victory,samson,both ravens,david,yellowjacket,the fox,the black owl,yank and doodle,the fighting yank,and the unknown soldier.

As long as it makes sense plotwise I would like to included these guys and girls as well. Crimsoncrusader 17:50, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Another Heroes Domain Question
I Have One Question: How many chapters will the first heroes domain story arc be?Golden one 03:17, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

7 is the plan right now for the first arc "The Dissapearing Act." Crimsoncrusader 17:50, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Quality Heroes I Have Picked
OK,Here Are The quality heroes I Have Picked:

Captain Triumph,The Raven,G-2,Spider Widow,The Clock,The Ghost of flanders,Blue Tracer,Margo The magician,711,Bozo The Iron Man,The Unknown,The Great Defender,Ace Of Space,Destroying Demon,Destiny,the spider, magno,and the ray!Golden one 22:19, March 29, 2011 (UTC)

HERO Initiative
Hi (cc'ing User talk:Strannik01)

I was wondering if PDSH would consider something to publicize and thereby support the HERO Initiative.

I recently became a member of the HERO Initiative: ''The Hero Initiative creates a financial safety net for comic creators who may need emergency medical aid, financial support for essentials of life, and an avenue back into paying work. Since inception, the Hero Initiative has been fortunate enough to benefit over 40 creators and their families with over $400,000 worth of much-needed aid, fueled by your contributions! It's a chance for all of us to give back something to the people who have given us so much enjoyment.''

We can talk all we want about how much we value comics and, presumably, the people who created them, but we can actually do something about it directly. When I was a kid, I just assumed everyone in comics was rich, because - how could they not be! Sadly, that's not the case.

You can become a HERO member for as little as a $30 donation. I would urge anyone who isn't a member to join today and help out those in need.

Plus, you get a neato membership card!! Sadly, my member number is in the mid hundreds - there should be thousands of members.

End of preaching.

Anyway, for more info, check out http://www.heroinitiative.org/

Maybe we could put something up on the Main Page, or that floating message at the top of the page?

17:22, March 25, 2011 (UTC)

I'd be cool with having something for the Hero Initiative. Crimsoncrusader 20:17, March 25, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah,Count Me In,TooGolden one 12:53, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

Fawcett Characters In Heroes Domain Question
Which other fawcett characters will appear in heroes domain?Golden one 12:52, March 26, 2011 (UTC)

As many as I can logically and legally include. Crimsoncrusader 17:51, March 30, 2011 (UTC)

Graphic Novel
Will There be a heroes domain original graphic novel anytime soon?Golden one 22:26, March 29, 2011 (UTC)

Once all the individual issues for the first arc are down I hope to collect them. Crimsoncrusader 17:52, March 30, 2011 (UTC)

Projects featuring the quality characters
I Would like to do projects featuring all of the quality characters,with the exception of plastic man and kid eternity.Golden one 02:35, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

Hale "Souvenir" Battle
Captain Battle number 2. Digital Comic Museum has a copy. Here's a pic here.

Hale makes a comment which suggest that he likes to collect souvenirs from his adventures which probably explains the nickname, but I haven't read the entire run.

Ok cool thanks. We can add it to the page then. It was the first I had heard of this so I just wanted to make sure it was correct.Crimsoncrusader 13:23, April 12, 2011 (UTC)

RE: Slide Gallery
Hi CC, Simon here. As you've probably noticed, I've been experimenting with the slide gallery function over the past few days. You might be interested in putting one on the main page to jazz things up a little. I've created a "sandbox" version in case you want to see how it might look:

Main Page With Slide Gallery

It's configured for Monobook, so it'll probably look a little different if you're using the "New Look" skin. Let me know what you think; we could have a different slide gallery every month if you like the idea. Cheers, SimonKirby 11:10, May 12, 2011 (UTC)

Modern Drawings of PD Characters
If you're interested, I've been commissioning art featuring PD characters over here.
 * Roygbiv666 Sig 001.png 20:36, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

Pretty cool Roybiv666. I'd be interested in adding some art to that, would you be interested me drawing a little something for you? Crimsoncrusader 23:50, May 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey, didn't know you did art, let's see it! I'm operating above budget right now, but I'll let ya know.
 * Roygbiv666 Sig 001.png 01:53, June 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'm actually in art school right now and I also do some writing on the side as well. Here's my Deviantart page for some samples of my work. Let me know if your interested and I can work with your budget no prob. Crimsoncrusader 03:55, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

Nelvana
I'm trying to find some decent images, preferably in color.
 * Roygbiv666 Sig 001.png 02:00, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

This is from Super Duper Comics #3. Crimsoncrusader 23:50, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

MLJ,Fawcett,And Quality Characters
I Would Like To Do Projects Of My Own Featuring The MLJ,Fawcett,And Quality Characters.Golden one 01:25, June 15, 2011 (UTC)

License
I think this image could not be in this wiki, it is the symbol of CC-BY-NC-SA

File:Kaballa 2010 804.png. Hyju 17:16, June 19, 2011 (UTC) other images that do not agree with the proposal of the Wiki:
 * File:Kaballa 755.jpg
 * File:HEROIS GOLDEN AGE 2 013-1.jpg
 * File:HEROIS GOLDEN AGE 2 011-5.jpg
 * File:Cabala 2010 haiti CC 999.png

Where can I discuss these images? Hyju 16:12, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

The Penguin
No, not the Batman villain ;-) There was a Canadian "White" called "Wow" Comics, which featured a character called the Penguin. See ComicVine or International Hero for info. A reproduction of Wow is here, along with many others. If you click on the link immediately below the cover called "Copyright/Source", it takes you to a page that says the comic is "© Nelvana Limited. Reproduced with the permission of Nelvana Limited."

However, I asked the question of whether it's PD on Golden Age Comics. Looks like there's no substantiating evidence that there is a valid current copyright holder. What are your thoughts?

22:39, August 5, 2011 (UTC)

What I Would Like To Do
Here's What I Would Like To Do,

Projects Featuring Several Of The Characters On The Public Domain Super

Heroes Wikia,Including The Fawcett,MLJ,And Quality Characters.Golden one 10:51, August 6, 2011 (UTC)

Heroes Domain release date
When will heroes domain#1 finally be available online?Golden one 19:29, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

Another heroes domain question
Will The First Issue Of Heroes Domain Be Available on indy planet soon?Golden one 01:58, August 16, 2011 (UTC)

Hi, is there a way that one or more of you could put in exactly when each character actually lapsed, at least the year would be helpful, you have when they were first created/published, but no indication of when each one lapsed into the p.d.jasontodd3@live.com/TARGET-DEFIANT 04:48, September 13, 2011 (UTC)

28 years after they were published or immediately in the case of works published without a copyright notice, its in the FAQ. However it might be useful to add more information about when and how each character fell into the public domain on their page so we'll have to work on it. Crimsoncrusader 15:13, September 19, 2011 (UTC)

Suggestions
Hi, Simon here. I've posted a few ideas on the Forum page, if you find time, could you look it over and tell me what you think? Ciao, SimonKirby 09:02, October 10, 2011 (UTC)

RE: Portal Page Experiment
OK, here's my first shot at structuring a Portal Page. I'll do some more fine tuning tomorrow, particularly on the Main Categories section (put them in rows, try to figure out a way to integrate thumbnails into the text). I designed it in monobook, so it probably won't look the same in the default setting.

I'm thinking it might be a good idea to create a new category specifically for Superheroes, ie differentiating between super-powered beings and "regular" non-powered heroes. We also need to separate superheroes from villains, otherwise chaarcters such as Nazi Shock Gibson might be listed under the proposed "Electrical Heroes" category.

For more convenient group discussion, please post your thoughts and advice on the Forum Page. SimonKirby 11:43, October 15, 2011 (UTC)

BTW: What do you think of the idea of starting a youtube channel for public domain superhero serials (eg "Spy smasher")? Might be worth considering SimonKirby 11:43, October 15, 2011 (UTC)

Portal looks good so far I'd go ahead and start on other when you get the chance and I agree we will need a Super Villains portal as well. As for the youtube channel, not a bad idea since it would be a good place to host any public domain serial. Crimsoncrusader 19:25, October 15, 2011 (UTC)

Pulp Heroes Portal
Here's the basic design for the Pulp Heroes Portal. I was thinking we could use a different color scheme for each one, as the wiki has become much more diverse over the past year or so. I also experimented with blinking text here, and plan to add more "special effects" as we proceed. Let me know if you think we're ready to add these first two portals to the front page.

I noticed that we don't have many entries under the Pulp Characters category. I'd like to add a few more to the list, but I'm not sure of the copyright status. Project Gutenberg has a number of Robert E. Howard novellas and short stories listed as public domain. Do you think it can be trusted as a reliable source for PD material? Ciao, SimonKirby 06:07, October 17, 2011 (UTC)

Color scheme variation is good, but only use special effects only if they aid in navigation or enhance the page we don't want to go over the top. I'll try and add the portals to the front page soon I just need to figure out how to add them into the layout of the page. As for Project Gutenberg, they tend to be pretty reliable but make sure it says its public domain in the United States there is an Australian Project Gutenberg that includes books that are not public domain here. For example I noticed you included, on the pulp portal, a character from Edgar Rice Burroughs' Venus Series which I do not believe is public domain in the States but is in Australia and Canada. Crimsoncrusader 15:24, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Super Patriot Portal
Next, here's the Super Patriot portal, home base for the "stars and stripes" brigade. Includes a youtube video for chapter 1 of Republic's Captain America serial (1944). Ciao, SimonKirby 11:41, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

Looks good SimonKirby keep up the good work. I've been thinking we should eventually make a mythology, film, and also a literature portal. Crimsoncrusader 15:26, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Let's create some original golden age super heroes and villains.
I Have an Idea,Let's create some Original golden age super heroes and villains.Golden one 19:56, October 24, 2011 (UTC)

I'll have to pass on this Golden One. I have a policy when creating characters to try and use as many characters published from the original time period as I can and reserve new characters for modern age stories. Crimsoncrusader 15:29, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

Goldenagecomics.co.uk.
Hello I am the owner of goldenagecomics.co.uk, I would like permission to use your profiles on goldenagecomics.co.uk. Is that ok? I will give full create to the author. Please advise.

Janus

Hey Janus good to hear from you. I have no problem with the idea. Crimsoncrusader 15:24, November 7, 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Captain ROC Page
You should email me before you deleted my page. That is just rude. You should email me before you deleted my page. By the way, all the characters on your page belong to Public Domain Super Heroes so you should not say "(All Characters), Artwork, and Content Copyright Jacob Minick 2010." - Captain ROC

Count Orlok
I would think that Count Orlok, being an illegal copyright infringement on Count Dracula (a situation similar to Wonder Man (Fox)) that we could have an entry on him? 02:36, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

The film Nosferatu was made before 1923 so its PD in the United States so we could totally have a Count Orlok article on the site. Crimsoncrusader 04:39, November 13, 2011 (UTC)

Hi, can you give me some advice?
Hi, I need some advice about an old comic character, so I thought I'd talk to the experts. Do you know whether Sally the Sleuth is in the public domain? I believe she first appeared in Spicy Detective Stories in 1934, although she was revived again during the 1940s. Another character with the same name turned up in the early 1950s, but apparently that series was canceled by 1953. I can't find any evidence of copyright renewal after that time. However, there were some reprints in the 80s and 90s, does that mean that the character isn't public domain now? Thanks in advance for any help you can give. Angieholbrook 09:41, December 16, 2011 (UTC)

Yes the original Sally the Sleuth would be in public domain since their is no record for renewal for Spicy Detective Stories. The re-prints were of public domain material so it does not remove the character from the public domain. For example, all the re-prints of the novel Dracula, Frankenstein, or Alice in Wonderland does not mean those works are removed from the public domain right? As for worries of any trademarks, they have to be renewed every five years so reprints in the 90s and 80s would have already expired. 19:24, December 16, 2011 (UTC)

Character Questions
Hi,Crimson Crusader,I Have Some Questions:

1.Should I Use Only The Original Golden Age MLJ Heroes In Any Projects I Do?

2.Also,If I Use The Fawcett And Quality Heroes In Any Projects I Do,Should I Exclude Madam Fatal,The Blackhawks,Kid Eternity,Plastic Man,And The Marvel Family?

Sorry To Bother YouGolden one 02:24, January 9, 2012 (UTC)

Good day sir.

My name is Jonathan and I work over at the DC wiki. Im a huge golden age contributor and a even bigger fan of public domain characters. Would love to get together and talk some stuff over about this wiki if you have the time. You can ussually find me over in the DC Wiki Chat majority of the time. Was hoping there would be a Chat box here but don't see one. I have access to pretty much every golden age and obscure comic ever printed and I think I can be of great help here.

I look forward to getting the chance to talk to you and helping out on the wiki.

Cheers.

Knightreaver

Regarding the posting of Animal Man, I noticed the character's name appears as "Animal Man" in the heading of the edit but in the article it says "Animal-Man".

I didn't read anything pertaining which citation to use if the character is available, as naturally DC has the character Buddy Baker AKA Animal Man.

So I am curious if he gets used for any purposes he should be listed as either "Animal Man" or "Animal-Man". I know it is a trivial detail but would like to know.

-Thanks

Cloak5000 00:19, February 29, 2012 (UTC)

Apologies for the information I gave for the horned hood, ghost and doctor death
Hi Crimsoncrusader

Sorry that my input turned out to be wrong, I got it from http://blaklion.best.vwh.net/gav_fawcett.html

They were right about the other Death Battalion members, so I assumed that they were right about these three as well

I'll try to be more wary of my sources next time

Green Lama character not public domain
I want to identify myself as the owner of the Green Lama character, as executor of the estate of Kendell Foster Crossen (and his daughter)--by way of explaining why I made the changes I did to Green Lama. People should not be misinformed about the status of the Green Lama. As I wrote, only the original comics are public domain. I hope you all found my changes acceptable. I don't mind having the character featured as long as this distinction is made clear. I wanted to write to the admin crimsoncrusader but could not find any contact info. {C contributions/50.36.24.62|50.36.24.62]] 14:29, April 16, 2012 (UTC)Kendra Crossen Burroughs, mehery at gmail

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.I have double checked the copyright records and confirmed the renewal status for Double Detective Magazines where Green Lama's literary appearances occurred. Our goal is to keep people informed about the copyright status of these characters and clear up misconceptions, so the changes to the page seemed appropriate. However, I did adjust the formatting to match the rest of the website by moving the content into the Notes section of the page instead of the character biography. Crimsoncrusader 00:19, April 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * Crimson - Regarding Green Lama, it may be helpful to research Green Lama more carefully before making changes one way or the other. With all due respect to Ms. Burroughs, there is no way that "the comics are public domain but the pulp stories are not"...it doesn't work like that. If the pulp stories came out first, were registered and renewed and refer to the same character, the comic books ARE owned by the copyright holder, whether it is the Crossen family or someone else. If the pulp stories are PD or the "Green Lama" is a different character than in comics, then the comics may in fact be PD, which means any modern use of the stories is good to go. This wiki has been down the road of "copyright holder claims" before, like with Carbanaro, or DC or Eisner, All-Negro, etc, etc, etc. - KJR 64.222.94.115 12:04, July 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * KJR - You are totally incorrect. There is no dispute that the comics are public domain, even if the pulps are. Nobody can claim ownership of those comics, period. They are a totally seperate entity than the pulp stories, regardless of what similarities there are in the characters used. Remember that characters can not be copyrighted, only pictures and stories involving them. The fact that the comics are derviative of the pulp does NOT entitle the owner of the pulp to the NEW ideas and expressions in the comic. This is why, for example, the Fleicher Superman cartoons are public domain, while Superman is not. It is also why George Lucas can not claim ownership of Star Wars fan films, even though they use his characters. George sponsors contests, with the stipulation that he can show the entries, but he could not just download a fan film from the Internet and make it a special feature on the next BluRay edition of Phantom Menace. While a fan is technically violating copyright by putting a Darth Vader in his film, George would be violating copyright by trying to assume control of a film that he did not make. Maybe if George sued, he could ask to be rewarded custody of the fan film's copyright in a settlement, but I don't think a judge could make that award without the case ending up in the Supreme Court. Bottom line is, you only own what you make, unless it's a work for hire, and each individual work is subject to the copyright laws of its day. Another example: If you carve a statue and someone else takes a picture of it...then they own the picture, not you. Every individual artwork is its own entity. Owning the rights to a piece of art does NOT entitle you to the rights of all derivative work, or the guys who made Superman should own just about every superhero ever made. And by the way, there are substantial differences between the pulp Green Lama and the comics version. For example, the version used in Project Super Powers has almost nothing to do with the pulp version, except the name, the color of his clothes and the connection to Tibet. Take away the name, he's a totally different character. The Green Jet version is definitely its own character. But again, just because someone owns the pulp stories, doesn't mean that they get to ignore the copyright registration laws of the time, with any work that is arguably derivative. Freeuniverse (talk) 20:32, July 18, 2012 (UTC)Freeuniverse


 * Freeuniverse - I am a huge advocate of the public domain and tend to take a very wide view of it. However, I also detest "arguements on the internet" to which tend to turn into he said/she said with little resolution, so please, please be 100% sure before telling me I am "totally incorrect". I urged caution, simply caution, before assuming that Ms. Burroughs claims of ownership are either correct or incorrect and posting them as fact. I come here to be helpful, and then only reluctantly, because once upon a time I was told there was "NO WAY" Captian Marvel was public domain, nor the Quality characters, etc, etc, et all. If you find my comments helpful then fine, if not, ingore them.


 * That having been said, if the comics are derivative of the pulp, and the pulps do in fact belong to the Crossen Estate, either by contractual release or by reclaimation, then the comics themselves, being deriviative of those pulps, are the property of the Crossen family. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anderson_v._Stallone) Derivative works are not entitled to copyright protection in and of themselves. In your example, a Star Wars fan film would be derivative, and while Lucas would not own it, the maker of the fan film couldn't do anything with it, and Lucas could indeed use the "new ideas" within that film to create new Star Wars works.


 * Even if Ms. Burroughs has specifically placed the Green Lama comics into public domain by affirmation, the pulp stories on which they are based cannot be used as the basis for new works as they remain derivative of the pulp stories. Saying Project Superpowers merely took the basic color scheme, name and connection to Tibet to create a new and different character would be like saying if I made a character in a blue suit with a red cape, called him Muscleman, made him the last son of a dead world and gave him powers far beyond mortal men, then I'd be in the clear if I changed his secret name to Howard Lipschitz. Nonsense, the character would still be, essentially, Superman.


 * In regards to what has come to light and the Green Lama character, if I were to want to use a similar character for a story, I would note that the character was originally "White Lama", based on Theo Bernard, what you have left is a character who got magic powers in Tibet, with a cape, who calls himself Jethro and who recites "Om Mani Padme Hum"...take away the Jethro name, that character is probably usable, not as a PD character, but as a new expression of tradtional ideas, which Ms. Burroughs most certainly does not own. I wish you the best in creating new comics. -KJR 64.222.94.115 03:22, July 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * KJR - I appologize, that did come off a bit combative, and that was not my intention. I just got my hackles up, because I feel like there is a tremendous amount of misinformation circulated about Copyright law on the Internet. People speaking in a tone of authority about absolute nonsense. It makes me want to bang my head against a wall sometimes.


 * Let me say that I still must respectfully disagree with your assertions. Anderson vs. Stallone is interesting, and I don't agree with the judge's decision that the non-infringing parts of a work found to be derivative are not protectable, but thinking about it, I realize he is not the first judge to decide that. However, I still don't see any evidence that a copyright holder is entitled to the copyright of derivative works made by someone else (in the Stallone case, as I predicted, it was only as part of a settlement). Yes, the law says that derivative works are the exclusive privelidge of the copyright holder...meaning that if anyone else creates unauthorized derivative works, those works are infringements, and therefore, not entitled to a seperate copyright. But I don't see where it says that copyright holders assume the copyright of infringing works. Take for example the case of the film Nosferatu or the comic character, Wonder Man (Fox). Nosferatu was found to be an infringement of Dracula, and therefore, its copyright was rejected and it became public domain. The exclusive copyright of the film was not transfered to the Stoker family. Nor was the exclusive copyright to Wonder Man transfered to DC.


 * Of course, this is all a slightly different argument than what we are talking about with Green Lama. In this case, the comics were not renewed. Even if the Crossen family had licensed Green Lama stories to the comic company, and the comic stories were nearly identical to the pulp stories (which they weren't), they are still two different works (two different forms of expression), that needed to be registered seperately. If the Crossen family owned the rights to the comics, then it was their responsibility to renew the comics. But nobody renewed the comics, and now they are public domain, period. Granted, if the comics were almost identical to the original pulp stories, it would be pretty hard to create derivative works, without infrining on the pulp stories that are still under copyright. But, take the character Falstaff for example. He was a villain who appeared in the Green Lama comic, but not in the pulp stories. Because he was not in the pulp stories, and the comics are public domain, the Crossen family can not claim exclusive copyright on the Falstaff story. If one of the comic stories was based directly on one of the copyrighted pulp stories, except that Green Lama doesn't look quite the same way he was described in the pulp story, then it would be impossible to make a derivative story, but you could use the art from the comic, since it bares no substantial similarities to the pulp story. This is why with a television series, like Bonanza, the first episodes may be under copyright, but later espidoes are in the public domain. Even though they are derivative of those first episodes, the copyright holder was still obligated to renew copyright on each individual work (each individual episode).


 * As far as Muscleman, there are a lot of companies getting away with almost that very thing. It's subjective and is based on how substantial the similarities are between characters. You're right, using the name, color scheme, tibet and magic, is probably enough to constitute a substantial similarity. I'm not arguing that Dynamite is in the clear. I'm just saying that they're overall interpretation was pretty different than any pulp story, and changing the name or any of those other elements, makes him almost a totally different character, like you said. Freeuniverse (talk) 20:26, July 19, 2012 (UTC)Freeuniverse


 * Just a brief note. I don't think I did say that changing an element makes a different character. I do beleive the pulp and comic versions of Green Lama are substantially the same character, the same as the Golden and Silver age Supermen would be. That said, it wouldn't take a lot with Green Lama to create a perfectly servicable stand-in. - KJR 66.87.2.142 21:24, July 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. I think there is a substantial difference though. The guy that Dyanmite used had a different costume, and was based on a character that could fly and shoot beams out of his hands, thanks to a special vitamin. I don't think that was in the pulp. I think he had a different supporting cast as well. If you changed the name, the only similarity would be that they are both guys who studied mysticism in tibet (hardly unique), and wore a green hood. That hardly meets the law's requirement of a "well defined character." Maybe change it to a red hood, and that character resembles the pulp Green Lama about as much as Amazing Man or the Flame. But that's my opinion. You're right, wouldn't be hard to make up a stand in, if it were necessary. But, if what Ms. Burroughs says is true, it might defeat the purpose of using the character at all. Guys like me, who are interested in Public Domain characters, I think we're mostly interested in paying homage to the past by bringing once-beloved characters back to life, or revitalizing good characters who never really got a chance to shine. For me, using a substitute would not be nearly as interesting as using a classic character. I have about a billion character ideas that I will never have time to introduce into stories, but I still take the time to reintroduce characters from the past, because I like the idea of being part of their legacy...hopefully someone in the future will continue the legacy of my characters 100 years down the line...

Trademark of Green Lama and other characters
Hey I noticed Kendall's message regarding Green Lama and took the liberty of looking into the registered trademark at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The only registered trademark on file for Green Lama belongs to Super Power Heroes, LLC which is Dynamite Entertainment. They also have trademarks on Black Terror, The Scarab, The Arrow, Pyroman, and The Owl, and have had them since 2007/08. So I assume this may put these other characters into dispute as well.TimStrange 00:44, April 17, 2012 (UTC)TimStrange

Thanks Tim we should probably add a disclaimer about the trademarks to those characters pages. Crimsoncrusader 00:49, April 17, 2012 (UTC)

Dynamite had no right to register that trademark and I will challenge it. 50.36.24.62 22:05, April 19, 2012 (UTC)Kendra

Actually, unless you published a Green Lama comic within the last 5 years, they do have a right to assume the trademark, for that purpose. There are a number of cases in which copyright and trademark are owned by different people. Take Captain Marvel for example. Oldest stories about a character with that name are owned by DC, but Marvel owns the trademark. There is also a new comic about a character called Joe Palooka, but it is not based on the copyrighted Joe Palooka character. You might have a case against them for copyright infringment, but if they beat you to the punch on the comic book trademark, they were smart. However, it looks like Dynamite has given up on Project Super Powers, so the trademark may soon expire anyway. Freeuniverse (talk) 20:39, July 18, 2012 (UTC)Freeuniverse

The Crossen Estate HAS issued Green Lama books in the past five years, but this is where IP gets tricky. Trademarks exists not to enrich the author of works, but to ensure the public is not confused regarding origin of a product. So, yes, Dynamite is entitled to register trademarks regarding Green Lama and other BRANDS of comic books, but to enforce them, the range would be quite narrow as to what was protected. The case could be made that only their specific logo is "trademarked", for instance. Or, if a property were to be in public domain, the trademark covering that product would have to be more closely delinated, such as "Wazoo Comics' Green Lama" versus "Ken Crossen's Green Lama". See (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dastar_Corp._v._Twentieth_Century_Fox_Film_Corp.) This sort of thing just happened with "Avengers", which in Europe had to be titled "Marvel's the Avengers" to avoid confusion with the "BBC's Avengers". (John Steed and Emma Peel) The "Hawkeye" action figure, for instance, is labled "Marvel's Hawkeye", due to Last of the Mohicians, which is untrademarkable.

Were this not the case, I could simply trademark "Santa Claus" or "The Easter Bunny", which of course, I cannot do. If the product is under copyright, then I would be the sole source which could legally issue a product under a brand name, and so therefore, DC can release "Batman Brand" magazines and trademark them. The reverse applies with say, "Plastic Man". Since Plastic Man is PD, while DC has trademarked the name for the purpose of producing "Plastic Man" brand magazines, they cannot be considered the sole source of such products. I could make and sell "Wahzoo Comics' Plastic Man Comics" and be legally safe. DC would STILL own the exclusive right to produce "DC Comics' Plastic Man Comics". 64.222.94.115 03:44, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

I agree with most of that, but I disagree with the notion that a copyright holder has exclusive rights to a trademark. Again, characters can not be copyrighted, only the works in which they appear. You also can't copyright a phrase with less than 3 words. You can't copyright the name Batman. If I create a character by that name, and he is a baseball player, I don't think that is an infrigement of DC's rights. Also, I have heard of several instances in which a company holding the copyrights to an IP has lost the trademark to another entity, which then licenses the name back. As I said, someone is currently producing Joe Palooka comics, and has registered the name, even though Joe Palooka still appears to be under copyright. Freeuniverse (talk) 21:30, July 19, 2012 (UTC)Freeuniverse

Re:Son of Tarzan
I thought I was in the public domain, I scored some images whose license is incorrect.Hyju 02:11, May 4, 2012 (UTC)

Required Log In
I've noticed that the last several edits have been made by unidentified wiki guests, and now it appears that the Mars (God) article has been deleted. Any idea of why the article was deleted? I'm beginning to think that maybe we need to restrict editing access to wiki contributors who actually log on, so we have an idea of whether we are dealing with a trusted contributor or some random vandal. I know that I've forgotten to log on a few times, but it really only takes a second, and I don't think a serious contributor will mind. The wiki has grown big enough to be a very important information resource, and I'd hate to see the many hours that you, me and others have out into it, messed up by someone who doesn't care enough to log in.

I agree with you, but is there a way to restrict editing to members for the entire wiki and not just page by page because if we had to go through every page it might be time consuming? Crimsoncrusader 02:21, May 24, 2012 (UTC) to

Well, that I don't know...I assumed there was some kind of setting, but I've never been a wiki admin. Can a non-admin do this to the pages they create? I'd be more than happy to restrict the pages I create, as I create them, but I don't know if that's an option for me. - Freeuniverse

Questions
Hi,crimson crusader,

I have some questions to ask you:

1.If I Decide to use captain marvel,and the green lama in any stories i write and draw,should i re-name them to avoid legal problems with DC Comics and the crossen estate?

2.If I decide to commission you for some artwork,how can i contact you?

Golden one (talk) 21:59, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

Green Lama Status
The topics on the status (trademark/copyright) of the comics/trades etc. is interesting - perhaps it should be copied or moved into the Talk page of the entry for posterity? Roygbiv666 (talk) 01:56, July 24, 2012 (UTC)

Holy Trademark, Cat-Man!
Hey guys, I've been using your site now for a long time, working with these public domain characters has been fantastic and I think it's great that you guys have this wiki going. My big question for you guys is this: With Dynamite Entertainment trademarking tons of public domain characters, what does that mean exactlly? Does that mean if I wrote a book about Cat-Man I would have to call it "Nine Lives" instead of "Cat-Man"? Kind of like the Shazam and Capt. Marvel situation? Does this mean I can still film a web series involving these characters? I don't mean to throw so many questions at you guys, I just wanted to know because all of a sudden all these characters are off the table. Please help a writer out. Thanks!

50.142.140.46 11:54, August 11, 2012 (UTC)

For the most part it sounds like you have a good grasp of things. In a nutshell though when using a public domain character who think is trademarked make sure your version cannot be confused for the trademarked one. Trademarks are all about brand protection so that if consumers see a product they know its officially endorsed by the company and not a knock-off. The Shazam/Captain Marvel situation echoes this quite well. DC makes sure on its products that no one will confuse Billy Batson with Marvel's Kree warrior. Please also read the FAQ if you have not yet to help get a better idea of things.

p.s. - I also like the idea of a Nine Lives Comics for Cat-man its a good title. Crimsoncrusader (talk) 17:28, August 11, 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It was me (Red Rube) who made the edit on the Ocotpus. I saw the word exposing and figured you meant explosion. Hope that was okay? I forgot that I had an account and just edited it from the library computer that I was on. I thank you guys very much for this site. It is definitely a wealth of information. Keep up the good work. Red Rube (talk) 19:06, August 13, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer of help, I appreciate it. This is a really cool Wiki!

Thomas Harris (talk) 02:33, August 17, 2012 (UTC)Thomas Harris

Adding the Charlton characters
Any thoughts on adding The Question, Blue Beetle (Ted Kord) or any of the other Charlton characters? They were published with incorrect copyright noticed, and hence, were PD the day they came out. Most of the original books carry the copyright notice "International Copyright Secured", rather than the required "Copyright Charlton Comics".

Probably while be adding those characters soon. I have just been kinda busy as of late. Hopefully will get to them this week. Crimsoncrusader (talk) 04:24, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

I thought Dan Garret (one T) was the only PD Blue Beetle - is that not the case? (Frevoli (talk) 14:20, August 22, 2012 (UTC))

Yes, Ted Kord's first appearance did not have a proper copyright notice putting him into the public domain, but because of DC's trademarks and copyright claims it would be next to impossible to use him. Crimsoncrusader (talk) 19:09, August 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * Not really. You cannot use trademark to control a copyright free character. See the Dastar decision of the Supreme Court. - KJ Ryan 66.87.4.176 09:16, August 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * I am aware of that but that doesn't mean they won't take you to court over it and legal fees are expensive. So you might be like Fawcett and win the lawsuit against DC but have the legal fees drive you into bankruptcy. However, I'll still add the page people just need to be aware of the risk involved. Crimsoncrusader (talk) 17:19, August 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * Is there anywhere you can download the Captain Atom and Blue Beetle comics? I'd like to see the copyright statements myself. I think some of these "improper copyright notices" are kind of questionable. Freeuniverse (talk)Freeuniverse
 * Is there anywhere you can download the Captain Atom and Blue Beetle comics? I'd like to see the copyright statements myself. I think some of these "improper copyright notices" are kind of questionable. Freeuniverse (talk)Freeuniverse

Here:
 * Blue Beetle
 * Captain Atom Crimsoncrusader (talk) 05:00, August 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * Crimson - You are aware, if they wanted to, DC or Marvel Comics could sue you over a ham sandwich, complete with legal fees. The question is, do you want the wiki to be "public-domain super-heroes" or "characters you can use without getting sued"? The latter is kind of a collection of blank pages. Did you know there's been lawsuits with Marvel and DC with people who CREATED certain characters themsevles? Like Gary Freidrich and Ghost Rider or Marv Wolfman and Nova (Richard Rider). While I'm at it, Nightcrawler was created by Dave Cockrum for DC's LEGION, not X-Men, and so cannot be a Marvel "work-made-for-hire" character. Marvel only owns him because they make a claim to, its more likely the Cockrum Estate owns him. - KJR 66.87.4.143 08:01, September 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * Nightcrawler as a Legion Character (Pre-X-Men)66.87.4.143 08:12, September 22, 2012 (UTC)

KJR - I'm fine with the pages being here and more than familiar with with Wolfman and Friedrich's legal situations with Marvel, though the Nightcrawler thing is interesting and I was not aware of that. I merely was giving ample warning that there is higher risk when using these characters compared to lesser known or more obscure ones found on the wiki. But like I said I'm fine with any Charlton characters who are PD being added to the wiki. Crimsoncrusader (talk) 04:38, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Legacy of the Masque
Hello,

I was wondering if you could help spread the word about my webseries Legacy of the Masque, which draws heavily from several public domain superheroes as a portion of its backstory.

"Diana Bowman, granddaughter of Golden Age superhero Miss Masque, discovers the truth of her family heritage upon inheriting her grandmother's worldly possessions. Seeing how awful the world is, and inspired by her grandmother's youthful crusades, Diana adopts the identity of the Masque and begins patrolling the city as a vigilante hero. With the assistance of a retired superhero from the 1940's the Masque begins a series of adventures fighting crime and standing for justice.

Written and directed by Travis Legge"

More info is up on our Facebook Fan Page: http://www.facebook.com/whoisthemasque

Our cast can be seen at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2186881/

Arc 1 of Legacy of the Masque is available on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Legacy-Masque-Arc-1/dp/B008WGHDBS

Thanks,

Travis Legge

OK. I will.

Thanks for deleting the Category:Goddess Characters page I created by mistake. I also created Template:Category redirect and Template:Cmbox in an attempt to fix that too: you can probably delete those too.  Maya vini  07:32, September 23, 2012 (UTC)

Johnny Dynamite: Too Hot To Handle?
Hey all, I had a quick question regarding one of the new characters that I found on the site: Johnny Dynamite. I was wondering, is Johnny Dynamite actually public domain, because I have been reading online that a Max Allan Collins bought the character and all his comic issues in 1987 and then had a limited run of comics in the mid 90's. So, what I'm digging at here is, is Johnny Dynamite still a public domain character or not? Any information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Yes, Johnny Dynamite's first appearance as well as the subsequent appearances from the 1950s were not renewed when their copyright was due 28 years after publication allowing them to fall into the public domain. All of the new books put out by Max Allan Collins in 1994 and 2003 are owned by him (they are derivative works), but the original books are public domain and there copyright status is not effected. Unfortunately for Mr. Collins, he tried to buy the rights to a character in 1987 when the rights had expired in 1981. Crimsoncrusader (talk) 16:48, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

Excellent. Thank you for clearing that up for me. :)

Re: The Weeper

Yep, you are right. I confused him with a Plasticman villain called "Sadly-Sadly" which had the power to make people cry and want to help him (by giving over their money and property because of his pathetic look on his face). It's even more "Anti-Joker" than the Weeper and it's an innate ability and not caused by tear-gas. This, in my observation, may have carried over to the "Brave and Bold" cartoon episode, influencing the depiction of the Weeper there (since it seems he had no powers to make people cry other than tear-gas in the comic books from reading the web). It also makes somme sort of homage-sense, in that Plasticman's own villain has a similar schtick, so they stuck in Weeper for a double-homage (since the story is loosely based on an Earth-S crossover shown in the Joker #2 series). Sadly-Sadly made his debut in Plasticman #20 and is even shown on the cover.

BioHunter-Silver (talk) 21:51, February 25, 2013 (UTC)

Also, I am still learning this Wiki-code thing
Yep, still learning!

BioHunter-Silver 22:03, February 25, 2013 (UTC)

No problem if you have any questions feel free to ask me or the other admins/users. Crimsoncrusader (talk) 01:40, February 26, 2013 (UTC)

Hi CrimsonCrusader!

I just made a page for "Midge, the Doll Girl' but, mistakenly entered the characters real name (Martha Roberts) as the title. Is there a way to fix this?

Thanks in advance,

Carter.

Yes we just need to move the page to the new title. I'll go ahead and fix it for you Crimsoncrusader (talk) 04:24, March 21, 2013 (UTC)

I joined and am looking to add some characters
I just joined, and there are a number of characters I'd like to add, mostly French Characters and Pre-Dracula Vampires (those 2 overlap some). I'm gonna have to go over the guidelines first. I do have a Question. If a for example 19th Century French work is Public Domain, but the only available English Translation isn't, should that be something I make a Legal Note of?MithrandirOlorin (talk) 12:21, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah I'd make a note of it. Crimsoncrusader (talk) 18:36, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

Hi, You're welcome for the edit. It was just one where it said Flamebird instead of Firebird. I tried to sign in, but I forgot my username and passowrd. I'll have to see if I can find which email address I signed up with.75.146.216.126 08:29, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

That cool, but just let you know its an automated message even though I do appreciate the edits. Crimsoncrusader (talk) 18:14, April 17, 2013 (UTC)