Spider-Man Sued For Altering Ads

By Jack April 12, 2002 11:44 AM

Owners of various buildings in Times Square have filed a lawsuit against the Spider-Man for digitally erasing a Samsung advertisement and replacing it with one for USA Today.

Reader Discussions:

Post YOUR opinion too!

OH PLEASE!!! reply

Posted by Skullfire (hulacete@ubbi.com) on April 12, 2002 12:11 PM

Excuse me? Spider-Man is the reality now? Why didn't NY sued Superman for using Liberty Statue on Metropolis? Or for erasing the WTC in the first Spidey's trailer, or using it on the movie? Who gave Captain America permission to use the US flag in his shield or suit? A comic's government? Gee, those corporations have to squeeze money out of everything...

RE: OH PLEASE!!! reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on April 12, 2002 4:12 PM

Patrick Ewing.

RE: OH PLEASE!!! reply

Posted by Skullfire (hulacete@ubbi.com) on April 13, 2002 5:22 PM

Ewing what?

RE: OH PLEASE!!! reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on April 15, 2002 6:20 AM

Can they put you in the movie Skullfire, and then make you out to be a neo nazi skin head?

WHY NOT?

Well, because you have certain rights, if they are going to put you in the movie in the first place and not pay you anything, the very least they can do is represent you accordingly. Your parents, freinds, and business colluges would most likley be upset if you were made out to be something your not, and the buisness ventures these properties invest in are no different, each one of these properties has dozens of owners, and a change like the one this movie company wants to make will hurt them in several ways. Furthermore, why is it necessary to change the billboard in the first place?

Of course I cannot speak for you, but I would not want myself or my property to be represented in any other light than it's own. The buildings in that area were all smut not even a decade ago, and through very hard work, with former mayor Giulianni, and tens of thousands of man hours of work they turned it around into one of the most succesful areas on the face of the planet. Due to the Lease's they make with their billboards etc. they must keep by law the regulations in those lease's.

FRITZ
_____

RE: OH PLEASE!!! reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on April 15, 2002 7:27 AM

The change for the movie is not going to affect them in any way. The only reason that they are sueing them is because they think they might get some money.

RE: OH PLEASE!!! reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on April 15, 2002 12:22 PM

I doubt that. Most leases with high profile Manhattan skyscrappers include pictures representing the properties in the newspaper, movies, documenties, television, and so forth. remember that in NYC it's a regular occurance.

RE: OH PLEASE!!! reply

Posted by Skullfire (hulacete@ubbi.com) on April 15, 2002 12:26 PM

Fritz, I don't know US laws, but I can't believe they are suing based on something like that a fictional movie should be a copy of reality. Everybody knows this is a film of a comic character. After all, there's no Avengers mansion in Central Park, or even a Baxter Building, and no one sued Marvel Comics for that.
There's a big difference with that and me being a neo-nazi in a movie. Always property comes before civil rights or freedom of speech; the real reason, I've heard, is that Columbia Pictures is a Sony's company, competition of Samsung, the real add.

RE: OH PLEASE!!! reply

Posted by Submissive-Girl (S&M@eureka.com) on April 15, 2002 1:08 PM

Your argument is basing things that are not real, compared with what is happening, A real building being filmed, of course without seeing the Lease, there is no real way to know. Of course the law and lease obligations have to be upheld.

RE: OH PLEASE!!! reply

Posted by Daredevil (DD@marvelcomics.com) on April 15, 2002 1:53 PM

You the Man, Submissive Girl!

RE: OH PLEASE!!! reply

Posted by Jet Lie (Jet.Li.@miramax.com) on April 15, 2002 4:27 PM

OH PLEASE!!!!

Hiyyaaaaa!

Stop that reply

Posted by Jet.Li (No Email) on April 15, 2002 4:39 PM

stop saying OH PLEASE!!!, it's truly annoying.

Hiiyyaaa!

RE: City slickers reply

Posted by RED (Duster1@usa.net) on April 15, 2002 5:19 PM

I went to NYC once, it was amazing, but I think its a better place to visit than live. The Spiderman folks should just change the sign back and avoid all the trouble. Still waiting for the ultimate super hero movie "Hex", who remembers what I'm talking about! That was a great one.

RE: City slickers reply

Posted by ~TINY (No Email) on April 15, 2002 5:21 PM

Well, Hell yeah good buddy!

Seriously Hex would make a great movie, old bad ass cowboy flung into the far future. Good ideal.

RE: Hex reply

Posted by Indiana (Arch@MIT.net) on April 15, 2002 5:23 PM

Yeah Red, I bet that would be pretty good, I'd also be into Atari Force or Namor. To be a kid again.

RE: Hex reply

Posted by power-trip (powertripz@hotmail.com) on April 15, 2002 7:27 PM

What an excellent idea for a flick. Hex would be excellent.

As for changing adverts. CBS had to settle out of court with Samsung not too long ago becasue CBS "changed" a billboard in the background of Dan Rather's day long Millenium broadcast.

I figure Sony would have a case though becasue of the very reason Skully points out. Spiderman is a work of fiction. Even Sony would like to erase Samsung even if it is in their own heads.

RE: Hex reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on April 16, 2002 3:14 AM

Does anyone think they'll actually win? Well do ya? Punk?

RE: Hex reply

Posted by Skullfire (hulacete@ubbi.com) on April 17, 2002 4:45 PM

What's this PT? You concur with me?

But true, do you remember those lines at the end of a movie? About the similarity to reality...

RE:Skully right? reply

Posted by power-trip (powertripz@hotmail.com) on April 17, 2002 11:47 PM

Well, it's a good point. Don't let my support go to your head though.

RE: RE:Skully right? reply

Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on April 18, 2002 3:49 AM

OH PLEEEASE!