Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Machine Man #10

Expand Messages
  • Bruce
    The Diversions of a Groovy Kind blog recently posted Machine Man #10 (Aug. 1979), which was Ditko s first issue on this book. This issue sets Machine Man in a
    Message 1 of 5 , Jun 2, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      The Diversions of a Groovy Kind blog recently posted Machine Man #10 (Aug. 1979), which was Ditko's first issue on this book.

      This issue sets Machine Man in a very different direction from Jack Kirby's version. Kirby's Machine Man was a character struggling to find his identity - is he a machine or a man?

      Ditko's Machine Man is comfortable in his own synthetic skin. His conflicts are external, not internal. Like most Ditko heroes, Ditko's Machine Man stands on his principles, even if that means he has to stand alone. Although the talented Marv Wolfman wrote this story, it has Mr. Ditko's fingerprints all over it:

      http://diversionsofthegroovykind.blogspot.com/2010/05/sci-fi-week-diggin-ditko-machine-man-in.html
    • Rob Imes
      Hmmm, I found it interesting that the blogger posted the complete story and then claims at the bottom of the page that this falls under fair use.   Surely
      Message 2 of 5 , Jun 2, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Hmmm, I found it interesting that the blogger posted the complete story and then claims at the bottom of the page that this falls under "fair use."  Surely the blogger must know that Machine Man (and the contents of MM #10) belong to Marvel and that posting scans of the entire story is a violation of Marvel's copyright?  (Assuming that MM is still copyrighted by Marvel and not public domain.)
         
        Back to the topic of Ditko's Machine Man: I think the fact that Ditko inked his own pencils on this series is the best thing about it.  I liked MM #10, and liked even more some of the later DeFalco-scripted issues.  MM #18 was one of the first Ditko comics I ever bought, and I think the art on that is quite good (unless nostalgia is clouding my judgement)?
         
        Rob Imes


        --- On Wed, 6/2/10, Bruce <brucebuchanan53@...> wrote:

        From: Bruce <brucebuchanan53@...>
        Subject: [ditkomania] Machine Man #10
        To: ditkomania@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Wednesday, June 2, 2010, 10:49 AM

         
        The Diversions of a Groovy Kind blog recently posted Machine Man #10 (Aug. 1979), which was Ditko's first issue on this book.

        This issue sets Machine Man in a very different direction from Jack Kirby's version. Kirby's Machine Man was a character struggling to find his identity - is he a machine or a man?

        Ditko's Machine Man is comfortable in his own synthetic skin. His conflicts are external, not internal. Like most Ditko heroes, Ditko's Machine Man stands on his principles, even if that means he has to stand alone. Although the talented Marv Wolfman wrote this story, it has Mr. Ditko's fingerprints all over it:

        http://diversionsofthegroovykind.blogspot.com/2010/05/sci-fi-week-diggin-ditko-machine-man-in.html


      • Thom Young
        That particular Machine Man story won t be in public domain until May 2074 (assuming the US copyright expiration law isn t changed before then). The trademark
        Message 3 of 5 , Jun 2, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          That particular Machine Man story won't be in public domain until May 2074 (assuming the US copyright expiration law isn't changed before then).

          The trademark of the character will never expire as long as Marvel continues to renew it every ten years by publishing a Machine Man book.

          --- On Wed, 6/2/10, Rob Imes <robimes@...> wrote:

          From: Rob Imes <robimes@...>
          Subject: Re: [ditkomania] Machine Man #10
          To: ditkomania@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Wednesday, June 2, 2010, 10:47 PM

           

          Hmmm, I found it interesting that the blogger posted the complete story and then claims at the bottom of the page that this falls under "fair use."  Surely the blogger must know that Machine Man (and the contents of MM #10) belong to Marvel and that posting scans of the entire story is a violation of Marvel's copyright?  (Assuming that MM is still copyrighted by Marvel and not public domain.)
           
          Back to the topic of Ditko's Machine Man: I think the fact that Ditko inked his own pencils on this series is the best thing about it.  I liked MM #10, and liked even more some of the later DeFalco-scripted issues.  MM #18 was one of the first Ditko comics I ever bought, and I think the art on that is quite good (unless nostalgia is clouding my judgement)?
           
          Rob Imes


          --- On Wed, 6/2/10, Bruce <brucebuchanan53@ yahoo.com> wrote:

          From: Bruce <brucebuchanan53@ yahoo.com>
          Subject: [ditkomania] Machine Man #10
          To: ditkomania@yahoogro ups.com
          Date: Wednesday, June 2, 2010, 10:49 AM

           
          The Diversions of a Groovy Kind blog recently posted Machine Man #10 (Aug. 1979), which was Ditko's first issue on this book.

          This issue sets Machine Man in a very different direction from Jack Kirby's version. Kirby's Machine Man was a character struggling to find his identity - is he a machine or a man?

          Ditko's Machine Man is comfortable in his own synthetic skin. His conflicts are external, not internal. Like most Ditko heroes, Ditko's Machine Man stands on his principles, even if that means he has to stand alone. Although the talented Marv Wolfman wrote this story, it has Mr. Ditko's fingerprints all over it:

          http://diversionsof thegroovykind. blogspot. com/2010/ 05/sci-fi- week-diggin- ditko-machine- man-in.html



        • Bruce
          Yeah, I m certainly not defending or justifying the posting of copyrighted material. I just saw it and thought it would be of interest to fellow Ditko fans.
          Message 4 of 5 , Jun 3, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Yeah, I'm certainly not defending or justifying the posting of copyrighted material. I just saw it and thought it would be of interest to fellow Ditko fans. This blog has posted quite a bit of Ditko material from the 1970s and '80s, most of it from his Charlton work.

            I agree about the art, Rob. I find Ditko's work on this series to be quite strong. Was Machine Man the final mainstream series where Ditko inked his own work? I know he continued to ink his creator-owned independent material (and still does). But was this the last work-for-hire project where he inked his own stuff? I'm thinking it might be.

            I also have to give a lot of credit to Marv Wolfman. He either was really tapped in to what Ditko wanted to do, or he stepped back and let Ditko drive the direction of the series. Either way, his writing is a great fit with Ditko on Machine Man.

            Bruce
          • barryprl
            Fair use is a complicated and difficult issue to discuss in just one or two paragraphs or one or two books. It allows usually very brief use of works
            Message 5 of 5 , Jun 3, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Fair use is a complicated and difficult issue to discuss in just one or two paragraphs or one or two books. It allows usually very brief use of works (pictures or text) to be used for research, criticism, reporting and teaching. Most colleges have guidelines for its use, generally saying not to use more than 100 words. This varies on the length of the original document and the length of the secondary document.

              A major big deal, simply, is whether the original work is basically plagiarized or copied into the "new" work so that the second work would replace the buying of the first.

              If Lloyd, a very nice guy by the way, had used one page….maybe two, and analyzed it more, that would be fair use. However, he put up the entire comic, with very little commentary, and you would NOT have to buy the original to get the full story.

              From what I understand, this is considered "unfair use" and could get Lloyd in trouble.

              There is NO concrete set of standards and different judges may disagree on a lot of technicalities, however, in the case it is rather clear. Again, the commentary must add to the original, it cannot replace it.
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.