Licence copyright of a god? Thor related.

[TMP]

Well i mentioned this before....
A while ago I had some trouble understanding the legal rights to Marvel and the Thor.
And how they would pull this off in a Blockbuster movie... Thor is a god and therby nobody can copyright him...

I was wondering how would Marvel avoid issues of copywright if they presented the Norse God in the movie. Anyone could make the NORSE God Thor, Odin and nobody could claim rights to ownership unless its a special design. Seeing the comic the hammer, clothing is based on the Norse Viking style even the original god like stuff.

There is nothing about the drawing above that anyone can claim rights to. Chainmail, Helmet, Hammer, Blond hair on a Scandinavian Giant, We all seen this before...
However this bellow is a newer with now begining of something unique... But the hammer is a Norse hammer, And circel disc on a armor.. Not segnificant something you can relate a claim to...

Again no really design that is destinguished from something already exisiting.

BUT MARVEL PULLED IT OFF!
MARVEL HAVE NOW FOUND A SOLUTION TO PROTECT THEIR COPYRIGHT CLAIMS..... HOW?

THIS IS HOW:

They made a BRAND NEW DESIGN, I belive the one of the reasons for this design is because they cant claim right to a Norse Viking inspired God carracter. They had to make a NEW design that was so much different and stood out that they can call it their own.
The story of Vallhall and the gods they cant claim any rights to... But this "Flash Gordon" Inspired costumes they can.
As i said before i am sad that they messed up the God Thor and but nothing of the Norse in him, but thinking of this from this angle i can understand. But i dont agree. I really hope this is just a sceremonial suit or a suit made by SHILD and not his real suit.

 

[exoray]

There is nothing about the drawing above that anyone can claim rights to. Chainmail, Helmet, Hammer, Blond hair on a Scandinavian Giant, We all seen this before...

And there are no single words in a book/comic/play/poem/movie that are copyrightable either but the collection is, it's about the whole assembled image/product not the individual parts...

 

[themanwoaname]

dc has their own version of thor in the sandman series. he uses a small mallet rather than a large hammer.

if anyone remembers supreme, he had his own version of thors hammer that he lugged around.

 

[TMP]

Yes, but now they can copyright of the design of their toys products, collector items... And this protects their products allot more vs a Norse inspired Viking god design, that could be refferd to as historical and other take advantage of big time.

 

[exoray]

Yes, but now they can copyright of the design of their toys products, collector items... And this protects their products allot more vs a Norse inspired Viking god design, that could be refferd to as historical and other take advantage of big time.

I'm confused, what is your point?

Yeah they are going to exploit, profit and protect their properties that is the way the business works, why would you expect them to be any different then anyone else? The Thor in the comics is not an everyday Norse Viking, he is Thor! Just like Tarzan isn't an everyday jungle boy wearing a loincloth, he is Tarzan!

And just about EVERY comic to movie adaptation made in the last I don't know 20 years 'modernized' the costumes look distinctly from the comics, it's hardly anything new...

 

[exoray]

If you want to make a 'God' Thor go with the red hair/beard and traditional Norse/Germanic attire... That depicts the 'God' Thor accurately...

If you want to make a comic book/movie Thor then, well...

Same character but distinctly different...

 

[MattMunson]

I don't believe that the mods made to the costume from comic book to screen has anything to do with securing copyright. Marvel already owns the likeness to the character that has been featured in their publications for years. That's a lock.

I think your fundamental point is in interesting one though: how can you hold a copyright on god. (or A god). But that's not really what is at stake with the marvel character. They own the character/interpretation that they created.

 

[themanwoaname]

They own the character/interpretation that they created.

THIS. dc cant use marvel's interpretation of thor, thats why they have their own.

 

[DARTH SABER]

It's pretty simple -

The name "Thor" cannot be copyrighted, BUT the visual look, and background story that Marvel created for the character can still be copyrighted.

Basically, Marvel's Thor is based Marvel's own "superhero" interpretation of the norse god...Since Marvel was the one that created this interpretation, they own the rights.

The look of Marvel's Thor, is also copyrighted.
While individual items such as armor cannot be copyrighted, armor combined with other elements can be copyrighted.

Prior to Marvel's Thor character, there was never a Thor interpretation that had him wearing this exact combination of gold, red and blue, armor, knee plates, a row of chest discs, hammer and winged helmet.
Marvel was the first to incorporate all of these elements into one entity...Thus they own the design.

 

[terryr]

The traditional hammer looks like a 'T'. And the Norse wore it on a necklace, just like the cross these days.

Mjöllnir - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Marvel has a design copyright. Appearances only.

Stargate also has its own look for Thor, which is more of a outlaw biker thing.

Thor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[angelogpc]

A few weeks ago, I read in the newspaper that a guy was trying to claim the copyright of the Bible, isn't that the same thing?
:lol

 

[ob1al]

The Bible? Nice try, Lao Che....lol

He would be owed a bit of back royalties on that one eh?