Led to years of litigation
Yup. In my opinion Marvel should have had no grounds to stand on legally speaking.
It's actually really complicated. I'll be happy to explain in pm if you're interested. But not now. I have to get to work in a few mins.Or you might already know. You seem well versed on the subject.
I’m familiar, but thanks.
The reason Marvel prevailed is because DC was deemed to have abandoned the trademark after not using it for twenty years after they bought the rights to the character when Fawcett went bankrupt (caused by years of litigation initiated when DC claimed that the original Captain Marvel infringed on Superman’s trademark).
That being said, the final battle between Superman and Captain Marvel in Kingdom Come is pretty awesome.
True, and True. However the fact remains that there was already a trademarked character by that name. Just because they weren’t in use currently didn’t mean they didn’t exist. The LOTR franchise has been used as any kind of new movie material for almost 20 years. Doesn’t mean I can just make a movie and call it Lord of the Rings.
It's not the same thing. I am not an intellectual property lawyer, so I'll refrain from offering any further analysis. (Though I will point out that the word "orc" is in the public domain.)
I know it’s not the same, but everyone agrees it would be ridiculous to do it even if it were legal is my point. Marvel managed to establish it was legal for them to do it, via what was essentially a loophole. But it was still ridiculous for them to do so. The character already existed, and in general opinion it made them look bad.
I like the Monica Rambeau Captain Marvel.
I’m not familiar with that particular version. I’ll have to look into her. Personally I’ve never really been a huge fan of any of Marvels Captains, but who knows this one may be different.
Sadly almost every movie and tv show made these days has been poisoned with feminist cancer.
@LogicBomber True but at least in Shazam it was not rammed down your throat. it was just part of the story line.In Cptn Marvel it was used as a blunt weapon to beat the audience over the head repeatedly, there was no subtle plot play, just – POW - right in the kisser.
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
Not accurate!!!Shazam was created in 1940.
Really I thought 1960
No. Captain Marvel/Shazam was created in 1940 by Fawcett Comics.
Wow I'm impressed
My vote had absolutely nothing to do with what your talking about. My vote is due to the fact that Shazam was Captain Marvel 30 years before Marvel was even Marvel comics. Marvel stole the name of an established well like character as a promotional stunt, and then sued DC comics for using the Marvel name as one of their characters. It’s total bull what happened, but DC eventually just renamed the character to avoid having to deal with it. DC had legal rights to an already established character named captain Marvel but marvels trademark wouldn’t let them use that name because legal bullshit.
They are both modern. DC just renamed the charecter after the comic name with the new 52 reboot (2011). The film posters are both from the last 12 months though.