Stan Lee Media is suing Disney for 5.5. billion dollars in damages over the rights to Marvel Comics characters. Digital Spy.com reports that Lee originally signed over the rights to the characters he co-created back in 1998, but that Lee’s company SLM claims that an amended version of the contract was signed and is now seeking damages. In a weird twist of legal confusion, Stan Lee is not involved with the company at all. Yeah, it’s confusing. More on this report following the link above.
Donovan Grant
View articlesTypical college aged comic fan who wants to write and draw in the biz
You might be interested in …
Conway Returns to Spidey
by Brad Douglas
Marvel.com sent over this press release about Gerry Conway’s return to Spider-Man. Who Will Rule New York City’s Underworld? Find Out in AMAZING SPIDER-MAN: SPIRAL! This March, experience a Spider-Man story like you’ve never […]
X-Men DVD News and a Spider-Man Tease
Over at TVShowsonDVD.com, some early box art and a tentative date has been released for X-Men the Animated Series Volume 5. What might whet comic fans’ appetites more is the fact that the new Marvel/Disney […]
18 Comments
Leave a Reply
Crawlspace Discord

Social
Recent Comments
Hornacek on Craig’s Critique: Amazing Spider-Man #1000 (Non-Legacy #36): “Ravaged” or “Well, At Least We Have These Backups”: “@Paul Penna: “My guess, is that Cormac accidentally used his powers on his mother, accidentally erasing her memories when his…” Oct 7, 11:04
Brad Douglas on Spider-Variants of the Week 10/7/26: “This thing may have more variants than ASM #1000.” Oct 6, 18:48
Paul Penna on Craig’s Critique: Amazing Spider-Man #1000 (Non-Legacy #36): “Ravaged” or “Well, At Least We Have These Backups”: “My guess, is that Cormac accidentally used his powers on his mother, accidentally erasing her memories when his powers first…” Oct 6, 11:27
Hornacek on Craig’s Critique: Amazing Spider-Man #1000 (Non-Legacy #36): “Ravaged” or “Well, At Least We Have These Backups”: “@Paul Penna: I wouldn’t say I was liking Cormac before the Ravage reveal but his character was … “ok”. I…” Oct 4, 08:59
Paul Penna on Craig’s Critique: Amazing Spider-Man #1000 (Non-Legacy #36): “Ravaged” or “Well, At Least We Have These Backups”: “I’m surprised by how much I enjoyed Cormac Crane/Ravage. The story is well written, his powers are interesting and he…” Oct 3, 16:27
Hornacek on Craig’s Critique: Amazing Spider-Man #1000 (Non-Legacy #36): “Ravaged” or “Well, At Least We Have These Backups”: “@Big John: Yeah, an annual is a good comparison. Annuals used to have one big story and 1-2 backups, and…” Oct 2, 22:20
Big John on Craig’s Critique: Amazing Spider-Man #1000 (Non-Legacy #36): “Ravaged” or “Well, At Least We Have These Backups”: “This was a glorified Annual with A-List talent on the back-ups. And you know, if it was “only” an Annual,…” Oct 2, 18:09
Steve on Marco Speaks Spidey: Amazing Spider-Man #1000 – “Ravaged” Review: “When a creative team runs out of meaningful stories to tell about a character’s future, they inevitably start digging up…” Sep 30, 16:11
Brad Douglas on Spider-Variants of the Week 9/30/26: “Who’s getting all the ASM covers? You’d need to take out a loan. Thanks Mohammed for the work you do…” Sep 28, 23:55
Hornacek on Marco Speaks Spidey- Challenges of Doom: Spider-Man #1 Review: ““takes us back years for the previously untold first encounter between Peter Parker and Victor von Doom.” Wait, I thought…” Sep 10, 09:24



This story is on Reuters.com and many other reputable sites. According to Reuters, Walt Disney’s statement: “This lawsuit is without merit. It arises out of the same core facts and legal claims that have been rejected by three federal district court judges.”
I would agree that based upon other intellectual property claims in comics, that “Stan Lee Media” does not stand a chance…
@Boomstick-Other news outlets, like the LA Times and the Times Live have reported this so it’s looking like it’s true.
Stan very likely would have signed a straightforward contract signing over all creative rights to his employer. That was (and is) standard practice, though there may (or may not be) grey areas.
That said, it pays to remember that DigitalSpy is a gossip site. Much as many of us dislike Disney/Marvel’s corporate culture and prevailing atitudes, it’s smarter to wait until more definitive facts are in.
Stan never owned any of these characters, and surely he had the brains to know that. It’s one thing to let fans lionize him as if he was the sole creator of Spider-Man, which was unprincipled but not illegal. But he’s not stupid; he has known his entire professional life that Marvel Inc. owns all of these characters. I don’t believe Stan ever signed anything over to anyone.
“The question remains, are they using/acting in Stan Lee’s name?”
No. Not one bit. It’s sad that people will assume stan is behind this because of the company’s name.
“if they are not acting in his behest, how can they presume to be acting in his interest regarding his creations?”
They are claiming that Stan signed over all of his ownership to any marvel characters he created and that they now own them. Even if Stan signed his ownership over, it means nothing because he had no ownership to sign over. Stan Lee Media are acting on their own behalf to scam anything they can get that doesn’t belong to them.
I don’t have a lot of sympathy for Marvel/Disney. Marvel, not too long ago, had an infringement lawsuit they brought up in court dismissed because they (Marvel) were caught fabricating evideence. That said, if-IF-SLM is indeed acting without Stan’s permission, I don’t root for them eihter.
The question remains, are they using/acting in Stan Lee’s name? (a trademark he DOES own) and, if they are not acting in his behest, how can they presume to be acting in his interest regarding his creations?
This is probably going to be a prolonged, tangled legal mess, with neither side coming out smelling like roses.
@#10
… then I hope Marvel/Disney rapes them over a barrel!
A disturbing development, this. What puzzles me is how SLM can hope to sue for copyright if Stan himself is signator on whatever agreement is in question. And #8 has raised a good question about why SLM retains Stanb’s name. Has Stan himself issued any statement?
STAN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS! Stan Lee Media is the company that was run by con man Peter Paul and suckered poor Stan and others to invest in the company. Stan has long since severed all ties with the company and has even been involved in lawsuits against them. Despite this, they still have legal right to the name Stan Lee Media. Since going bankrupt, the company has brought up crazy lawsuits for outrageous amounts over and over again. It’s all a huge scam and Stan has enough class to have nothing to do with.
When I hung out in Stan’s office with the producers of his documentary (finally coming out on DVD), this subject came up and Stan express such shame and remorse for having been taken in by Peter Paul. He said he seemed so genuine and so connected to everyone and everything. He even arranged for Stan to meet then president Bush and receive a special lifetime achievement award from him. As soon as the company began to crumble and the shady deals started to show, Stan got the hell out and cut all connections. He’s been running his own company POW ever since.
Stan is not involved. Why would he get a cut?
why is it still called stan lee media when the man himself isnt involved anymore? 🙂 And if they win(however unlikely) Stan should get a huge cut out of it.
Really? Wow, that’s a new one on me.
Stan Lee is not even involved in the suit. SLM is his old company that tried to even sue him at one time. I hope this suit gets thrown out.
after what I’ve learned about the relationship between Stan Lee and Steve Ditko, I’m not sure how to feel about this…
I admire chutzpah. Stan-however peripherally he is involved almost certainly doesn’t have much of a chance of actually this, but you have to admire him. My feeling is that this is probably more geared towards “the principle of the thing” than actually winning the five billion.
I mean look at the prolonged legal war going on over the rights to Superman.
Still, good to see Stan’s indomitable spirit is undimmed.
From what I hear, Stan isn’t actually involved with this company. He’s with POW now.
Actually, it important to note that Stan Lee has nothing to do with this as he left this company in the late 2000’s
Go, Stan the man!