Lee Enterprises Nixes David Fitzsimmons Donation

Comments ⁹

1. Lost in A**2

   It sounds like Lee is asserting “work for hire” rights.

   1. Richard Furman

      This is the question. If it was work for hire, the it’s Lee’s IP. If the artist retained the rights, granting only first publication to the paper, then it’s his and Lee can go pound sand. If it’s something Lee is treating like WFH even though it wasn’t, that’s a whole ‘nother can of rats.

2. John Hines

   God bless MegacorpAmerika®! In Mammon we trust.

3. Brian Fies

   Outrageous. There’s a lawyer at the bottom of this for sure.

   As others have said, unless Fitz did straight-up work for hire, in which Lee claims to own all his work product, the physical pieces of paper with his artwork on them are his to do with what he wants. Writers donate their manuscripts and papers all the time; same thing. I could imagine Lee claiming some publication or reprint rights, though who’d pay money to republish an obsolete editorial cartoon?

   Even in the earliest days of cartooning, when syndicates owned all the copyrights, cartoonists got their originals returned and were free to give them to fans, hang them in galleries, donate them to institutions, or burn them for warmth. The situation in comic books took decades longer to sort–artists like Jack Kirby had to fight for the right to get their work returned while publishers used it to sop up water leaks–but for quite a while now the situation has been that the company retains the copyright but the artist gets the art.

   Lee’s belligerence is certainly unprecedented in the modern era. If I were Fitz, I’d be tempted to donate them anyway and let the chips fall. Lee would lose.

4. Mike Peterson  (admin)

   I wish I could be surprised, but I’ve worked for Lee. When the paper I worked for was acquired, but before the pact was signed, I dropped my boss a memo about some work I’d done on the side, mentioning that it was copyrighted to me, just to have a piece of paper in case I needed to prove it wasn’t Work For Hire.

   Working on a gentleman’s agreement only functions when you’re working with gentlemen. My boss and I used to read the memos from Corporate and laugh, but it was gallows humor. I eventually quit, he was handed the cardboard box a few weeks later. We were each better off for it.

   It would be nice if some non-profit would take an interest in this case, because I wouldn’t expect one retired artist to stand up against a corporation alone.

5. David Hendin

   The issue focuses upon existence of a contract or an employment agreement. Who owns the paper and pencil/ink? If none exists then one can look to precedent.

   That said, I have often heard of employers or syndicates who donate original art generously to those who will care for it and appreciate it.

6. Steven Rowe

   The value of old comic strips is like old entertainment, variable. Plenty of stories of movie studios melting prints down for silver, and KFS using original art to mop up flooding. And editorial cartooning where someone is needed to explain what the joke was, is even less attractive to big money.
   If Lee bought the physical item as well as the intellectual property, did Lee pay the sales tax? If not, some courts have ruled that Lee might have a lot of back sales tax to pay.
   So no cartoonist rights organizations that can point the direction for help?

7. Dwain

   F**k Lee. Long live Fitz!!!! It has nothing to do wiith money, just pure need for control. The trump dummies only like control. This is a good reason for Fitz to start over. Let’s do it all over.
   (This comment has been edited)

8. Carrie DeLeon

   I am from Tucson. I loved his editorials!