User talk:Strannik01

Hi, welcome to Public Domain Super Heroes! Thanks for your edit to the Yankee Longago page.

Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Peteparker (Talk) 03:29, April 29, 2009

Plastic Man and the Black Hawks
I definitely see your point about Plastic Man, but I do have some research to back up the claim of his copyright status. Police Comics #1 (1941) was never renewed which featured Plastic Man's first appearance. DC renewed only some issues of Plastic Man's self titled series from the early fifties. Cash Gorman and The Copyright Office Records show that these early appearances were never renewed. However, if Plastic Man is trademarked by DC (which I believe he is), there are restrictions on how he could be used and possibly it would not matter if he was in the Public Domain. A similar situation that is shared by Tarzan and the Marvel Family, the works on in the public domain, but the characters are still trademarked. I agree with you though it is probably better to air on the side of cation until we gain more evidence. - Crimsoncrusader
 * Thank you for bringing both websites (documents?) to my attention. In light of what I read, I still think we can't safely assume that Plastic Man is in public domain (or at least not 100%), so... I guess we're in agreement. --Strannik01 21:53, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Literary characters
The only literary characters that have been added thus far are characters that also appear in superhero comics. I don't intend to add any other, and as far as I know no one else has added any other. However, I agree in that there is a risk in getting a cluttered wiki. I'll try to be careful when adding more characters.

--Ifrippe 16:03, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Sounds good --Strannik01 16:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

cant get my password
hi Stannik-

I have an acct. as "flameape". i edited the text for ROCKET BOY just now- forgot i wasn't logged in, then came to realize that i forgot my password. OY! anyway, i haven't received my password via automated email- can you:

1. attribute the edit on rocket boy to flameape?

2. send me my password?

much appreciated.

I am also making my own artistic takes on various PDSH's. you can see them on my blog- http://flameape.org - just hit the public domain superheroes tag on the tag cloud on left sidebar. I'm about to publish many more including, nightmare & sleepy, 13, vulcan, destroying demon and more.

Thanks and keep it up! -- Greg Giordano, aka, "flameape" 05:28, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

[mailto:flameape@gmail.com flameape@gmail.com]


 * Greg - thank you for sharing your work (no, seriously, it's actually kind of neat). Unfortunately, I can't help you with the password - you'll have to contact Wikia admins for that, since they the ones who actually have password information information (lest you forget, the user accounts are universal for all Wikia Entertainment member wikis rather than one wiki in particular). If I were you, I would your junkmail folder (if you haven't already) - the password reminder e-mail may have wound up there. --Strannik01 08:17, February 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * P.S. I looked at this wiki's user list and you aren't on it, so no, there is definitely nothing I (or any other admins) can do to help you --Strannik01 16:04, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

Rogers Rangers deletion- sloppy SLOPPY research skills!
Rogers Rangers come from Kid Eternity #6 which is definitely beyond question in the public domain, in fact it is openly and legally available for download as a zip file around the place. To delete a historical figure entry for Rogers Rangers, who appeared in a comic and were instrumental in it in fact, is terrible research skills, and undermines the wiki credibility.

Also as an actual comic book writer and artist, damaging the wiki entries like that makes the wiki way less useful as a research tool to me.


 * At the risk of pointing out the obvious, this is a wiki about public domain comic book characters. As per current policies, we allow original characters that appeared in Golden Age comic books, open source characters and literary characters that appeared in comic books. We put those restrictions, because, like all other wikis under the Wikia Entertainment umbrella, we aim to create resource that's focused on a certain specific topic - in this case, comic book public domain characters. While putting in, say, historical figures, might be useful to your research, it will diverge from this wiki's focus. That and it isn't terribly helpful. All historic figures are, by definition, in public domain. I don't see what makes Roger's Rangers special enough or different enough to deserve their own entry.

That said, I am willing to put the matter up to a vote. --Strannik01 22:29, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

I'm cool with there being a Rogers Rangers page if they appeared in Kid Eternity #6, but maybe we can just add them to the list of Kid Eternity summons on the Kid's page and link the Wikipedia article. But like Strannik01 I'm also OK with voting. Crimsoncrusader 00:36, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

help: cabala is public domain and no
I don't know if the program will translate right I wanted to post on cabala similar as it is this passage of the captain atom: "While the first appearance of Captain Atom and all of his Silver Acts Appearances plows public domain, any appearances after 1977 of Captain Atom produced by Charlton, DC, or AC Comics plows NOT. "  or be... that up to 2009 everything that I did on cabala is of public domain and everything that I do starting from 2010 be not  the articles here can be edited ... then you should have explained to me and edited with me in that sense.

talk to me


 * Well, that's what you should have said in the first place, mate. I am not sure if this sort of thing fits under wiki rules, but I have no objection to you adding an article with this disclaimer attached. --Strannik01 14:59, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

Also, please format the title properly and use proper wiki article format.
"Also, please format the title properly and use proper wiki article format."

wiki can be edited then you were able to for in the format that can be since I don't know as


 * Use any of the other articles as an example. Every article should include the description of the character, the character's appearances and any legal notes that may apply. You should also include proper categories. --Strannik01 14:59, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

don't I have permission for speaking with Crimsoncrusader?
because?


 * I don't understand what you're saying here. --Strannik01 14:59, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

thanks
what this?

"See Cabala for the current version.

To see all changes to this page since your last visit, click here

No edit summary was given

Please visit and edit often..." --Miguel Rude March 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * I changed the title to fit with proper Public Domain Super Heroes wiki format. Crimsoncrusader reformatted the rest of the article. It's all good. --Strannik01 03:14, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

this is very good
thank you very mutch!

then I send the cover of the bio47 N° 2 --Miguel Rude March 20, 2010 (UTC)

see brazilian profile of cabala:

http://hqquadrinhos.blogspot.com/2010/03/cabala-by-miguel-rude-leandro-silva.html

thanks!

Magno
I recently created a disambiguation page for Magno. You might want to update your story to link directly to Magno (Ace), rather than Magno.
 * Roygbiv666 Sig 001.png 14:49, March 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up. Will do. (Incidentally, thanks for doing all those disambiguation pages. They make this wiki much easier to navigate) --Strannik01 15:22, March 28, 2010 (UTC)

Creating a Community
Hi "Stranik." I'm not certain if you are one of the administrators on this site, but based on your volume of contributions to this site, I'm going to assume that you have an interest in this, whether you are an administrator or not. My name is Jason, and I am the creator of the Free Universe site (universe.1free.ws). My site is not meant to compete with this one, but to serve as a compliment. While this site tries to preserve PD information about Golden Age characters, my site seeks to expand on that information and stake out additional IP territory on behalf of the public domain.

One of the other major reasons why I created my site, was that I was very frustrated that this wiki did not provide an easy way to communicate with the community that is interested in these characters. I felt I had no way to ask questions or make suggestions. I have only recently come to find these "talk pages" and I'm still getting used to them. They are, quite frankly, a little hard to follow, and I'm not sure that many people even know about them. So, part of my purpose in creating my new site, was to create a forum, where people like us could communicate, debate issues and answer questions for newbies. Unfortunately, my site has yet to gain any real fallowing and nobody has registered on the forums.

So, I have proposed an idea to crimsoncrusader, the most prolific admin on this site, and he likes my idea, but he'd like me to shop it around to see how others felt. My idea is that I would be willing to change the graphics on my existing forum to make it a joint PDSH wiki / Free Universe forum, if you guys would be willing to link to that forum on this site and make it an official meeting spot. I'd also be happy to make any admins on this site, admins on the forums. I really think everyone on this site could benefit from an improved means of communication. I think it would go a long way towards encouraging more people to get involved in our efforts. It might also help establish a community that is ready and willing to create new freely licensed characters. I just think it would be a big benefit. Let me know what you think, if you get a chance.


 * First of all, I am an admin, along with Crimsoncrusader and MadMikeyD. I have no objection to your proposal. I am not sure how much good it will do, but I think the idea is, at the very least, worth a try. I am sure my fellow admins wouldn't mind linking to your forum or your site. I should note (for the sake of full disclosure) that I, personally, have no interest in creating freely licensed characters, but I certainly wouldn't discourage others to do that if that's what they want.


 * On a slightly related note - I am not sure if you already registered, but it would make communications much easier if you did. And, once you do, please take the time to sign your posts. That way, I (and other users) will be able to identify you without having to cross-reference your IP address. Thank you much. --Strannik01 03:02, April 3, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for fixing the coding on my userpage. I'm kinda new to wiki-editing.Yzz, Master of DOOM 21:59, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

Category removal...
Shouldn't we keep the "Characters" tag on pages like War Nurse and Frankenstein (Prize)? Yzz, Master of DOOM 16:10, June 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * I figured that now that we have separate tags for all media, having general "Characters" tag serves no purpose. If I had the time and the patience, I would delete the generic tags (such as ) from the character pages and leave the more specific tags . I would keep the generic tags as category tags to put together the more specific tags. Am I making any sense? --Strannik01 16:50, June 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * * Ah, okay. Sounds good.Yzz, Master of DOOM 16:57, June 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Since the main page says "For a complete list of featured characters: ", should we continue removing the Characters category articles or stop? Yzz, Master of DOOM 15:27, June 11, 2010 (UTC)
 * *I think we can continue removing . People who click on this will be able to look at all the characters - it's just that now, the list will be broken down by category (which will hopefully make the browsing easier). --Strannik01 17:22, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

No Gentlemen thieves?
Dude there are no gentlemen thieves here, even though there are quite a few and Arsene Lupin has long slipped into the public domain. Otherwise, keep up the good work. The Clock 10:30, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

We just haven't made a page for them yet. Every public domain character is not on the wiki there are too may to even count. I would highly suggest adding some pages for gentlemen thieves yourself. Crimsoncrusader 21:21, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

Wonder Man
Regarding the addition to the entry about Eisner's testimony, technically it is an alleged transcript. Maybe we should cite the original site as source.
 * Roygbiv666 Sig 001.png 14:48, July 3, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think that's fair --Strannik01 17:49, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

QUESTION ABOUT DOROTHY GALE.
IF I CHAGED THE MIDDLE NAME, OR ADDED ONE FOR HER, AND CALLED THE TITLE OF THE PAGE BY HER CALL SIGN "TWISTED", WOULD THIS BE CONSIDERED DERIVITIVE, OR OPEN SOURCE??


 * If the character in based on original Dorothy Gale in any way, shape or form, it is considered derivitive. So, no, cosmetic changes such as adding an oridingal call sign don't count. Now, if you wanted to contribute an original open source character, that would be a different story. --Strannik01 20:51, October 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Lovely. Days of relative inactivity end with kneejerk chastising a new contributor for violating completely unpublished rules about, once again, what this site SHOULD BE ABOUT. I suppose Wonder Man should be removed, too. He was shown in court to be derived from Superman, after all. Maybe there can be another exciting (and unending) vote about whether there should be another exception to the unpublished rules.
 * Oh, Christ on a stick... Dear anon - as I explained to Target-Defiant, I was referred to modern-day characters derived from existing public domain characters, not derivative characters in general (otherwise, we would have to delete more than just Wonder Man). The rule is not unpublished - it's on the main page. If you want to put the matter to a vote, I wouldn't object, and I am sure neither would the other admins. But if you do bring the matter to a vote, do it while you're signed on, please. Thank you much. --Strannik01 23:41, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

KAY. I HAVE A FEW PUBLIC DOMAIN/OPEN SORCE CHARACTERS IVE CREATED. IS THERE A SPECIFIC WAY (OTHER THAN THE CAPPS LOCK THING) THAT I SHOULD DO SO?TARGET-DEFIANT. 15:57, October 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * Look at any of the existing pages. Generally, you should include a the picture of the character, the info box with the image of the character, his or her first appearance, creator and publisher, the listing of appearances (if any - there being any rule requiring the characters to actually be published) and a disclaimer where you explicitly relinquish copyright and make the character open source. See other pages with open source characters for details on how such disclaimer should be written.--Strannik01 23:41, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

BY THE BY,-IF SAID RULES ARE UNPUBLISHED...HOW AM I, OR ANY OTHER "NEWB" SUPPOSED TO FOLLOW THEM??-ALSO: DERRIVITIVE CHARACTERS FROM KNOWN PUBLIC DOMAIN CHARACTERS SHOULD BE ALLOWED HERE, F THE AUTHOR OF SAID CHARACTERS WANTS TO FREELY ENTER THEM INTO THE PUBLIC DOMAIN. IS THERE A WIKIA SPECIFICALY CREATED FOR THIS ALREADY,- OR CAN YOU, OR I, OR BOTH START ONE?TARGET-DEFIANT. 16:02, October 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, you can start one if you like. I'd even be wiling to link to it in the sidebar. As far as the rules, you do have a point. While most of them aren't "unwritten," I don't think anybody took the trouble of putting them in one place. So, for future reference, here is the summary:


 * This wiki is for public domain characters from all comic books, comic strips, pulp magazines, books, movies, serials and television programs. Open source characters are allowed. Radio characers are not allowed (see wiki FAQ). Real people are all in public domain by definition - you can include fictionalized depictions of real people from public domain works (in other words, biographical stories don't count). Generally speaking, we tend to stick to characters that can be considered super-heroes or adventurers under any definition of the term, as well as their sidekicks and supporting characters. Don't submit copyrighted characters. Don't relinquish rights for characters you do not own. Characters with disputed copyright status are allowed so long as the article clearly indicates that the rights in dispute and so long as you explain why you believe the character is in public domain (the more legal evidence you provide, the better). The wiki entries should be about the characters as they were originally depicted in the original source material (though we allow speculation so long as it's clearly labeled as such). The articles should be written in in-universe perspective, though you can insert publishing and other real world information if appropriate. All images in the wiki must be work-appropriate. Spamming is not allowed, neither is vandalism. If a contributor persistently fails to follow the rules, he or she will be banned. If you want to advertise your webcomic/company/website/etc, message any of the admins and we'll be happy to add a link on the sidebar or on the main page - as appropriate.
 * I think that should about cover it. --Strannik01 23:41, October 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * DOROTHY'S TRADEMARK AND COPYRIGHT ARE BOTH PUBLIC DOMAIN. SHE HAS A RICH MAGICAL HISTORY, THEREFORE THOSE TWO THINGS COMBINED MAKE HER PERFECT FOR AN ADVENTURER, OR HERO. DERIVITIVES OF MAGIC CHARACTERS, WHOS TRADEMARK AND COPYRIGHT ARE IN P.D. SHOULD EITHER GO HERE, OR SOMEONE WITH ADMIN RIGHTS SHOULD CREATE A SPECIAL, NEW SECTION FOR THEM, AND LINK IT HERE. IM NEW TO THE SITE, SO I DON'T THINK I SHOULD CREATE IT PER-SAY, BUT I WOULD HELP CONTRIBUTE TO IT, AND ADMIN IT IF YA WANT.TARGET-DEFIANT. 06:09, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

LEGAL FACTS, SUPPORTED BY MULTIPLE FEDERAL LAWS.

 * ONCE A TRADEMARK LAPSES INTO THE PUBLIC DOMAIN, BY FEDERAL LAW, IT CANNOT BE RENEWED, OR BOUGHT. PERIOD. IT IS THEN FOR EVERY MAN, WOMAN, AND/OR CHILD TO PUBLISH LEGALLY, BOTH THE TRADEMARK, AND THE COPYRIGHT. IN MARVELS CASE THEY DIDN'T PAY MONEY FOR P.D. HEROES. THEY STOLE THE NAMES, AS THEY TRADEMARKED THEM, AND LIED TO THE PATENT OFFICE CLAIMING THERE WERE NEVER ANY OTHERS WITH THOSE NAMES. YET WONDER-MAN, DR.DOOM, DAREDEVIL. HELL-CAT, E.C.T. WERE ALL CREATED WELL BEFORE TIMELY EVEN BECAME MARVEL. -DECADES BEFORE. ONCE SOMETHING, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO A NAME IS CREATED IN THE SAME MEDIUM, IT CAN NOT BE LEGALLY DUPLICATED EXACTLY. U CAN MAKE A DERIVATIVE NAME THAT MEANS THE SAME THING, BUT NOT UTILIZE NAMES THAT LAPSED, AND CLAIM SOLE OWNERSHIP. WHICH IS WHAT DC AND MARVEL REGULARLY DO. STAN'S DAREDEVIL MAY BE SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT, BUT HE STILL UNJUSTLY, TRADEMARKED HIS VERSION, WITH MARVEL, UNDER A NAME THAT HAD LAPSED DECADES EARLIER. YOU CAN NOT HAVE TWO DAREDEVILS, JUST LIKE U CANT HAVE TWO CHARACTERS NAMED BATMAN. THE EARLIEST VERSION WITH THE NAME WINS BY FEDERAL LAW. IF THAT VERSION IS LAPSED AS U, & THIS SITE CLAIM, -THEN EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO THE TRADEMARK AND COPYRIGHT. ALSO HOW DID MARVEL MAKE TRADEMARKS POPULAR, WHEN SAID TRADEMARKS PRE-DATE THE COMPANY BY ALMOST TWO FACTUAL DECADES?? -THEY CANT LEGALLY TRADEMARK THEM. THEY ARE PUBLIC DOMAIN. MARVEL CAN USE THE NAMES SURE, & THEY CAN MAKE MONEY OFF OF THEM. BUT SO FACTUALLY CAN EVERYONE ELSE. NO ONE MAY TRADEMARK OR COPYRIGHT A P.D.CHARACTER LEGALLY. THERE ARE FEDERAL LAWS THAT BACK THIS UP, WHERE ALL FICTION IS CONCERNED. ENGLAND AND EUROPE HAVE SOME OF THE SAME LAWS AS WELL..THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF "PUBLIC DOMAIN".jasontodd3@live.com 22:07, November 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * SPEAKING OF ACTUAL, FACTUAL, FEDERAL LAWS, ALL OF THE ONES PERTAINING TO PUBLIC DOMAIN CHARACTERS, -ESPECIALLY ONES BOTH MARVEL AND DC CLAIM OWNERSHIP OF,
 * SHOULD BE LINKED TO EACH AND EVERY PROFILE, LIKE BLUE BEETLE, AND DAREDEVIL, SO THAT THE WORLD CAN SEE EXACTLY WHAT MARVEL AND DC ARE DOING AGAINST FEDERAL LAWS, BY THREATENING LEGAL ACTION AGAINST PEOPLE WHO WANT TO PUBLISH NAMES ON THE COVERS, OF WHAT HAS FACTUALLY LAPSED INTO P.D.jasontodd3@live.com 03:48, November 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * As others on this wiki have tried to explain to you, trademark and copyright are not the same thing. Copyrights can fall into public domains. Trademarks can't. Once a company stopped using them, they can be claimed by anyone (see the Captain Marvel trademark situation). By the time Marvel trademarked their versions of Daredevil and Wonder Man, the originals were long since out of print (Dr. Doom, for the record, was never trademarked. Neither was Hellcat. Just because a character appeared in a comic book does not mean he or she automatically becomes trademarked. In order to secure a trademark, one has to actually publish a comic containing a trademark in it's title and/or advertising materials. So, no, you do not know what you're talking about. I have looked at your website, and, quite frankly, nothing I've seen there convinces me that you are in any position to throw around any legal weight.
 * And, as others have noted, kindly STOP WITH THE BLOODY ALL-CAPS. It's hard to read and it makes it even harder for anyone to take you seriously. I really don't think it's too much to ask. --Strannik01 04:28, November 30, 2010 (UTC) k., fine, capps lock off...-
 * we at M.K.U.I.I., are in the same medium. a website is a form of factual publication, and has been decided so in multiple already decided court cases. we have a right to bring federal laws concerning confusion in the same marketplace, and trademark disputes to light in court before a judge and joury. also if specific trademarks can be renewed as u claim,-then public domain copyrights arent public domain where the specific medium of comics are concerned. -the covers sell the end product, just as much as the interior art and writing. if no one can put the name of the liv gleason daredevil on a cover,- or as the title of a film, it could be stated marvel is monopolizing the name of two factualy different, yet confusingly identical entities by the same name, in the same medium. as both had hadicapps at one time, and both had the same spelling of the same name. this keeps public citizens from wanting to spend the effort to utilize public domain characters. and is against current federal laws in the comic book/literary fiction medium. the laws im citing are federal. any admin on this site should automatically know of them, or at least have researched them. and they should have been reseached, and re-researched, before the main admin of this part of wiki,- started this p.d. part of wiki. they should also be clearly linked to from the various character profiles.jasontodd3@live.com/TARGET-DEFIANT 06:07, November 30, 2010 (UTC)

Category:TITLE Characters
Do you see any value in having categories for the characters appearing in a given comic, ex. Category:Wonder Comics Characters, Category:Target Comics Characters, etc.? Or is it overkill. A lot of the Golden Age comics were anthologies, featuring various characters.
 * Roygbiv666 Sig 001.png 23:42, January 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * I think that's overkill. During the Golden Age, titles constantly got renamed and altered - keeping track of it all would be a headache (for example, how many versions of Black Cat Comics are there?) I think publisher categories do decent enough job most of the time. The only exception I would be willing to make is for characters that appeared in A-1 titles. --Strannik01 00:13, January 3, 2011 (UTC)

Other Public Domain Properties
I was reading "Stupid Comics" on Mister Kitty (.org) yesterday, and in one story they mentioned an element they were looking for called "Ernium" This got me to thinking that, besides the regular elements, and Adamantium, what else is there? Wikipedia has a list of fictional elements, some of which will be in the public domain, others may be trademark and copyright.

Also it's great that there are two fictional countries here on this site, but there are probably others. Again Wikipedia provides examples, and common sense would dictate that if a property is old enough that it would be in the Public Domain.

I would take the time to be bold and help edit, but I've got a lot of things to do (including holding up two jobs and starting my own business). If however, you have a specific task and don't have the time, or for some reason would like someone else to undertake it, drop me a line on my talk page. The Clock 05:25, January 21, 2011 (UTC)

Yep there are numerous fictional countries and elements such as the elements Alkahest and Cavorite and fictional countries such as Lemuria and Mu. Thanks for the offer of help we appreciate all we can get. Crimsoncrusader 03:05, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Reply
Thank you for that But I already know I was wondering if i can transfer all of the pages to heroes inc wiki in one go It will be hard enough with the authors revision but A base is needed for the articles. Thank you again for All the work you have put into this wiki please respond on my talk page.--FossilLord 04:20, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

And heres the link. http://heroes-inc.wikia.com/wiki/Heroes,_inc._Wiki --FossilLord 04:53, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

WONDER-MAN 1
It should also be noted,-that wonder-man did not have every original power of superman. he lacked the same speed, and x-ray vision, and a few years later superman could fly, not just leap.


 * And, as I said in my editing note, that is irrelevant. At the time of the lawsuit, Superman did not have x-ray vision and could not fly. Their powers were, if not outright identical, very, very similar. --Strannik01 01:39, January 27, 2011 (UTC)

WONDER MAN WAS NO WHERE NEAR THE SPEEDS CLARK RAN IN HIS ONLY APPEARANCE.


 * No idea how you can possibly support it, since the comic never gave their actual speeds in terms of miles per hour. They both seem pretty fast, and that's good enough for me. Why is it even important to you, anyway. The lawsuit was settled in National's favor. That's a historical fact. --Strannik01 01:39, January 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * This is important for legal reasons.
 * No, it's not. The character is in public domain - whether or not he infringes on another character's copyright is no longer relevant. --Strannik01 02:42, January 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * a ring gave him the powers through magic, hes not an alien. clark has the speed of near sound, in action one, faster than a locomotive. it is never established through the wonder-man appearence, what his speed is.
 * Yes it was. As per Page 5, panel 2, it was at least a hundred yards per bound. Kindly reread the original story--Strannik01 02:42, January 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * also by today's laws a power set cant be copyrighted, or it constitutes a monopoly on the medium.
 * They can't anymore. But, at the time of the ruling, Superman was unique enough for the power set to be copyrightable. And, once again - Wonder Man is in public domain. The court's decision is no longer relevant.
 * i will prove the wonder-man and captain marvel victories by dc false victories.
 * See above. --Strannik01 02:42, January 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * in court. i will also prove that marvel may not own a trademark on characters they didint create.
 * Yeah... Good luck with that. And yes, I do mean it sarcastically. --Strannik01 02:42, January 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * unless you can prove outright, that wonder-man was in fact the same exact speed as clark, at the time of his appearence, there is no reason to leave that edit i made out. he is not a speedster. at no time within the book is it established that he is.
 * Your note was irrelevant. Regardless of the merits of the case, the court decided in National's favor. Now that Wonder Man is in public domain, he can be published by anyone regardless of what the court decided. The note arguing about the merits of the case serves no useful purpose. --Strannik01 02:42, January 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * It serves to establish the fact that it was never outright stated, anywhere in the wonder-man comic that he was as fast, or faster than a locomotive, or superman. fact. the hundred yards per bound had to do with leaping ability, not running speed. obviously its you who needs to re-read the context. also trademarks may not legally be associated with lapsed characters. this is a current federal law. as the trademarks constitute a block to make money with these lapsed characters, which promotes greed, monopoly, and rewards companies who let them lapse before re-publishing them in the first place. also: it seems to be only you, who regularly chooses to clash with me. could it be a personal problem you have with me?? my lawyer might like to hear about it. do not edit my edits. petition someone else to do so. and ill take it up with them. there is no mention of how fast wonder-man is in the comic. period. therefore no one can just assume that the author intended him to be as fast as superman. fact.jasontodd3@live.com/TARGET-DEFIANT 03:06, January 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * It serves to establish the fact that it was never outright stated, anywhere in the wonder-man comic that he was as fast, or faster than a locomotive, or superman. fact. the hundred yards per bound had to do with leaping ability, not running speed. obviously its you who needs to re-read the context. also trademarks may not legally be associated with lapsed characters. this is a current federal law. as the trademarks constitute a block to make money with these lapsed characters, which promotes greed, monopoly, and rewards companies who let them lapse before re-publishing them in the first place. also: it seems to be only you, who regularly chooses to clash with me. could it be a personal problem you have with me?? my lawyer might like to hear about it. do not edit my edits. petition someone else to do so. and ill take it up with them. there is no mention of how fast wonder-man is in the comic. period. therefore no one can just assume that the author intended him to be as fast as superman. fact.jasontodd3@live.com/TARGET-DEFIANT 03:06, January 27, 2011 (UTC)