Marvel trying to shut down TechCrunch 'Iron Man' screening

Marvel has issued a cease and desist letter ordering TechCrunch to cancel a screening of the film 'Iron Man' in San Francisco on Wednesday.

(Credit: Paramount Pictures)

On Tuesday, I received an invitation to a special Wednesday screening in San Francisco of the forthcoming Paramount film, Iron Man, which opens officially on Friday.

This actually was the second invitation I had received to a screening--the first was for a Tuesday night showing that I was, sadly, unable to attend in the end. And it was looking a whole lot like the Wednesday one wouldn't work either.

But now I'm thinking I may have to work extra hard to make it.

That's because I read this evening that after TechCrunch announced Tuesday that it was buying out a theater in San Francisco to host a private screening of the film, it subsequently received a cease and desist letter from Marvel Comics, demanding that it cancel the planned exhibition.

According to TechCrunch founder Michael Arrington's post, Marvel attorney David Althoff wrote to order the screening be canceled because, "You have not been authorized to exhibit, sell tickets to, nor invite the public to an Iron Man screening."

Now, it's well known that CNET News.com and Arrington/TechCrunch have not always been on the best of terms, but I have to say that, based on my understanding of this situation, Marvel is way, way out of line here. And I just have to object. Loudly.

Arrington wrote that TechCrunch worked directly with Paramount in setting up the screening and paid for each of the seats in the theater.

So, what is Marvel's problem? This is the same company, by the way, that back in 2004 sued video game publisher NCSoft for creating an environment that allowed players of its City of Heroes virtual world to craft avatars that could look like Marvel characters.

The two companies later settled, and while the terms were never made public, everyone knows that Marvel got it butt handed to it in the resolution.

Now, for some reason that makes very little sense, and is only going to bring it a round of very bad PR--Yes, thank you, I'm helping with that--it is trying to shut down what seems, on the surface at least, to be a perfectly legitimate showing of a film. One that has the apparent cooperation of the studio that made it and the theater that's showing it.

Arrington, by the way, noted in an update to his original post about this that Marvel's rationale for shutting the screening down had something to do with--wait for it--"public safety."

Uh, yeah.

So, knowing that fur may well fly and that lawyers may bare their, er, briefs, I just think that I have to be there.

Stay tuned on this one.

[mbeaudoin]

Marvel vs Cryptic

It was later discovered that a bunch of the Marvel Clones running around the City of ... games were created from computers with IP addresses that were owned by Marvel.

[Daniel Terdiman]

That's right

I forgot about that part of the Marvel/City Of... lawsuit. Thanks for
reminding me. What a joke that suit was.

[R. U. Sirius]

Wow, this is going too far.

I'm no fan of TechCrunch, but, I have to agree with you. Marvel is way out of line with this. I think this is yet one more example of how the IP/copyright ownership mentality has gone over the deep end.

[dsatow]

Marvel productions

Marvel productions is a spin-off of Marvel Comics. While Marvel
Comics may own both, the left hand may not know what the
right hand is up to. Also, Marvel created the production
company because it didn't like what the movie industries were
doing to its IP. So, it may be possible that even though
Paramount sanctioned this, it may be complicating Marvel
productions own spins and controls on the movie which is why
its complaining.

On first look, it appears that this is wrong of Marvel in a knee
jerk reaction kind of way but I feel the need to help defend it
since all too often we don't know the whys before they get
permanently crucified on the web.