The Neil Gaiman/Todd McFarlane trial is currently under way in Wisconsin. Detailed coverage is being provided in such venues as comicon.com, http://www.newsarama.com, and http://www.icv2.com.
In short, McFarlane painted himself as the champion of creative rights, and was since revealed to be–predictably–the champion of his creative rights, but that’s pretty much it. Todd has made no secret of the pride he takes in burning bridges, and that apparently includes bridges constructed with the aid of (in this case) Neil Gaiman. Neil’s contributions to SPAWN not only gave Todd such characters as “Angela,” but it also gave him something even more important: Creative cred. The feeling in the comic industry was that if Neil was, metaphorically speaking, getting in bed with McFarlane, then McFarlane really had something to offer. Turns out he did: What he had to offer was further proof that power tends to corrupt.
Frankly, the current situation worries me. The jury consists of six people who know nothing about comics, McFarlane, Gaiman, or copyright law. I know that’s how our judicial system works, but really–would you want your next coronary bypass to be performed by half a dozen check out clerks at the local Shop ‘N Bag? Six strangers can’t understand that McFarlane lies. That he’s proud of lying. That he boasts about lying (saying he creates “ghost Todds” for interviews.) That he lied on the stand about Tony Twist…and got away with it. Not since John Gotti has anyone been so cloaked in teflon; it’s impressive and amazing to watch in a way. It’s like watching a factory fire…except the factory is magically holding up fine and the rest of the neighborhood is going up.
Neil is in the right and Todd is in the wrong. I’m worried, though, that a jury will be taken in by Todd McFarlane. Why wouldn’t they be? Neil Gaiman was.
PAD
• 
This is a terrifying thought, and one that really only occurred to me for the first time when reading today’s trial update on Newsarama: “What if Neil doesn’t win…?”
It really never crossed my mind that he wouldn’t. I’ve never met Todd McFarlane, and from the sound of things, I haven’t missed out on much. But I’ve been fortunate enough to meet and speak with Neil Gaiman three or four times, and apart from the fact that he’s an unmitigated genius as a writer, and one of the best things to happen to the comics medium in the last twenty years or so, he’s just an awfully nice guy, and a gentleman to boot. He’s said more than once over on his blog that he didn’t even want to go to court, and tried repeatedly to settle this thing with Todd like a gentleman, but was left with no choice. And in a perfect world, it would be an open-and-shut case.
But it’s not a perfect world, and as we’ve all become painfully aware in some of the more public court cases over the last several years, sometimes the bad guys win. I hope this isn’t one of those times; I’d like to think that once, just once, karma will out, and that just once Todd McFarlane will get what’s coming to him. Of course, he’d appeal it, even if he did lose the case. But wouldn’t it be great for Neil Gaiman to have a victory right out of the starting gate?
I’m worried on Neil’s behalf too.
The one thing this cements in my mind is that a verbal contract isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on, and to always get things in writing.
It looks like the judge really constrained things to just the issue of what was agreed upon in the contracts. Too bad that Gaiman’s lawyers couldn’t make a case for demonstrating how McFarlane has acted in bad faith to others in the past.
Neil’s comment in his journal (“So the jury is out. They are seven ladies, and they really paid close attention all the time. I felt like they really care that justice gets done. I don’t think I can ask for anything more.”) really demonstrates yet again what a class act he is.
I hope he wins.
Hopefully, the partial tape of agreement that was introduced will be enough to prove Neil’s case. What worries me more than this trial are the appeals. Remember, Todd won the Twist case on appeal, and he could drag this thing out for a long time by moving up the system.
It never occured to me that he might lose, either. Who would have thought there was a chance that the best course of action here might have been to call Todd a f***head and move on with his life?
I’d be interested in knowing, PAD — is your own well-documented dislike of MacFarlane (The two of you were quoted browbeating each other for years in Wizard) relevant to a legal case, or did you simply find cause to dislike the man on principle?
In either case, would it have been prudent for you to offer yourself up as a character witness?
What I don’t think I’ve seen in the reports was whether Neil or Todd gave testamony, and if so how much and how it went.
Reason I’m curious is that if Todd went off like he did at the Peter moderated session at this year’s San Diego, I’d say he would’ve likely torpedoed his case by going off on extremely lengthy non sequiturs. Got to the point where someone in the audience asked a simple, factual, softball question; “Todd, what’s your favorite toy from your toy line?”
I leaned over to the person next to me and said “I make it an over/under of 2 minutes before he actually mentions a toy.” Sure enough, he went off on a non-toy related ramble. Peter spoiled it for me by, at the 45 second mark, shutting him down with something like “Todd. It’s a simple question. Just name a toy you like already!”.
Both of them gave testimony, and it doesn’t sound like Todd went completely mental on the stand. If I were to hazard a guess, though, I’d say that Neil was likely more intelligible and thoughtful in his testimony.
I don’t think Neil has anything to worry about. The fact that Todd’s lawyer actually cited jealousy as a motivating factor behind Neil’s suit will help. The jury may not know comics, but they do know that a man who lands on the New York Times best seller list is not likely to be jealous of ol’ Advantageous. (Plus, Todd didn’t wear a tie to court. That alone could cripple him.)
I think its a good thing the jury knows nothing about the case, if not for Neil Gaiman, then the case in itself. They’re not judging McFarlane’s character, they’re judging who’s right in this instance.
If Neil’s right, they should be able to see that. If Todd’s right, then they should be able to see that, also.
Neil just won.
Gaiman won. Now they move into the damages phase, and, I believe, the appeals process, so we’ll be hearing and talking about again in a few months.
Well, the judge made them go right to the damages phase tonight, and is looking to be done with it tomorrow, so the jury will be done before the weekend. Apparently this guy believes in swift justice. 🙂
yay! I do the happy dance of legal goodness!
WE WON!!!
…Ahem. Okay, I personally didn’t win anything. But the decision in Neil Gaiman’s favor is a significant blow to Todd McFarlane’s apparent insistence that the world revolves around him. As I said yesterday, I was really worried about what would happen…and since Todd is almost certain to appeal the decision, this isn’t over yet. But for now, it’s heartening to know that the good guys won for a change.
(Plus, Todd didn’t wear a tie to court. That alone could cripple him.)
Yeah, but did he bring the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders? 😉