Disney greenlights "The Muppet Show" comics

[frogboy4]

i am a big comic fan and this is going to be so wonderful i can not wait .

I really hope that i can get a subscription , and have that last a long time .

The muppet show comics are going to be so good for the sake of maybe we can have some guest stars in them just like the show was .

I wonder what the covers will look like for the first couple of issues ?

Many of the Muppet comic covers are listed at MuppetNewsflash and at Boom! Studios.

Muppet Show Kermit's Story 1:3
Muppet Show Kermit's Story 2:3
Muppet Show Kermit's Story 3:3 (Rough Draft)
Muppet Show Fozzie's Story 1:2
Muppet Show Fozzie's Story 2:2
Muppet Show Gonzo's Story 1:2
Muppet Show Gonzo's Story 2:2
Muppet Robin Hood 1:2
Muppet Robin Hood 2:2
Muppet Robin Hood 2:1
Muppet Robin Hood 2:2


The Muppet Show Miss Piggy's Story covers have yet to be released. She is the final installment in the initial 4 issue pitch. We could also get third variation covers like the one Alvarez did for Kermit's Story. A better version of that was up before, but it was taken down so the comic store could exclusively reveal the final piece later on.

 

[unclematt]

just a few weeks away. Who is getting excited.

 

[beaker]

The minor background characters on the cover certainly resemble Bert and Ernie. Those two characters were probably created as a homage to the famous Sesame Street duo, and they are clearly "Bert and Ernie"-types. But legally they are not Bert and Ernie from Sesame Street; and BOOM! isn't going to market these books with a big "Featuring Bert and Ernie from Sesame Street" sticker on the cover or use the trademarked names and logos or major uses of such characters (unless they get permission for the various rights).

It's the same principle that allows "The Simpsons" or "Family Guy" to have characters that resemble the Muppets or Sesame Street characters appear on their programs. Legally these guys aren't the real Bert and Ernie of Sesame Street. The only way they could get in trouble for these "Bert and Ernie"-like characters is if Sesame Workshop can prove that the characters in these comics infringe on their use of the characters and harm the integrity of the real characters, or if BOOM's use of such character can be proven to be misleading consumers and negatively impacting Sesame's brand and/or harming their business. A little homage or parody like this is legally fine.

Um, legally Bert and Ernie, and all Sesame Street characters are trademarked as Muppets.

Also, Bert and Ernie are clearly in the pilot bonus feature on the Muppet Show seasons.

I get what you're saying, but how sad is it that a Muppet property can only "homage" other Muppets?

I guess in a way it's like how Matt Groening said Futurama and Simpsons(in a 1999 interview) would crossover cameo now and then, especially with Kudos and Kang. But then the only "crossover" we get is Fry noticing a pile of Bart dolls and then a "surreal" sequence of Bender in The Simpsons.

Now legal mumbo jumbo aside, it *is* Bert and Ernie on the cover, who *are* Muppets.

Just because Jim Henson Company for example, can't refer to Fraggle Rock as Muppets...they're still Muppets. Jim Henson Company is allegedly not the owner of the Muppets anymore, but they routinely(thank goodness) use Muppet puppets from a variet of *Muppet* franchises and specials as characters in their Puppet Up and other HA projects.

Bottom line, only in legal mumbo jumbo world does that stuff even matter. Because to most fans including myself; The Muppet Show, pre Muppet Show specials, Sam and Friends, Bear in the Big Blue House, Fraggle Rock, Sesame Street, etc is and will always be Muppets(tm)

 

[Drtooth]

Um, legally Bert and Ernie, and all Sesame Street characters are trademarked as Muppets.

Unfortunately what the fans believe isn't what's reality. Ernie and Bert are copyrights of Sesame Workshop, while everyone else in the comic is copyright Disney. Remember, EMTV sold the Sesame Character Muppets to SW so they couldn't profit off them the way Eisner was planning on in 1989.

That said, they technically could put Snoopy or Inspector Gadget on the cover, and if they're just not recognizable enough, they can get away with it under "parody" rulings...

 

[beaker]

Unfortunately what the fans believe isn't what's reality. Ernie and Bert are copyrights of Sesame Workshop, while everyone else in the comic is copyright Disney. Remember, EMTV sold the Sesame Character Muppets to SW so they couldn't profit off them the way Eisner was planning on in 1989.

That said, they technically could put Snoopy or Inspector Gadget on the cover, and if they're just not recognizable enough, they can get away with it under "parody" rulings...

I love ya man...but...

Sesame Street characters are MOST definitely Muppets(tm)
http://www.sesameworkshop.org/globa...struts_action=/ext/workshopWebsiteSearch/view

 

[frogboy4]

I love ya man...but...

Sesame Street characters are MOST definitely Muppets(tm)
http://www.sesameworkshop.org/globa...struts_action=/ext/workshopWebsiteSearch/view

It has been known for a while Sesame Workshop has somehow been able to retain the right to continue to call its cast members "Muppets" but the rights to the characters themselves are separate. Also they do not (and I believe are not permitted to) use the term "Muppet" in the titles of their projects. Basically you are splitting hairs about an outcome that we already know and many fans don't like, but it's the truth. The properties once owned by Jim Henson are now divvied up into four companies:
The Jim Henson Company (Fraggle Rock, Emmet Otter, Labyrinth, Dark Crystal, Hoobs etc)
Muppets Studio (The Muppet Show/Muppets Tonight/Muppet Babies/Muppet movies casts and Bear in the Big Blue House)
Sesame Workshop (Sesame Street)
The Jim Henson Legacy (likeness of Jim Henson in live or puppet form and can sometimes include particular aspects of his work owned by Disney, Sesame and the Henson Company)
Coordinating rights between these companies is difficult at this time due to the fact that they are attempting to distinguish their brands independently from one another in order to strengthen them. You might disagree with the strategy, but there it is. So the use of Bert and Ernie representations in Langridge's comic are more of a wink to the characters than the actual embodiment of them. It's a fine line, but that’s what it is. We know who they are but legally they are not Sesame’s Bert and Ernie...wink…wink!

 

[dwayne1115]

So Ernie and bert aren't Leagal Wow thats a first! lol

 

[beaker]

It has been known for a while Sesame Workshop has somehow been able to retain the right to continue to call its cast members "Muppets" but the rights to the characters themselves are separate. Also they do not (and I believe are not permitted to) use the term "Muppet" in the titles of their projects. Basically you are splitting hairs about an outcome that we already know and many fans don't like, but it's the truth. The properties once owned by Jim Henson are now divvied up into four companies:
The Jim Henson Company (Fraggle Rock, Emmet Otter, Labyrinth, Dark Crystal, Hoobs etc)
Muppets Studio (The Muppet Show/Muppets Tonight/Muppet Babies/Muppet movies casts and Bear in the Big Blue House)
Sesame Workshop (Sesame Street)
The Jim Henson Legacy (likeness of Jim Henson in live or puppet form and can sometimes include particular aspects of his work owned by Disney, Sesame and the Henson Company)
Coordinating rights between these companies is difficult at this time due to the fact that they are attempting to distinguish their brands independently from one another in order to strengthen them. You might disagree with the strategy, but there it is. So the use of Bert and Ernie representations in Langridge's comic are more of a wink to the characters than the actual embodiment of them. It's a fine line, but that’s what it is. We know who they are but legally they are not Sesame’s Bert and Ernie...wink…wink!

I'm not splitting heirs. I'm talking about what virtually everyone but lawyers know.

First of all, in retrospect it is of utmost fortune for all these properties to be split up. Yes, we all whined about the mere idea of Disney taking over.

But, if JHC had to focus on Muppets...they'd never be able to even think about a Fraggle Rock film and rejuvination. Or even the Henson Alternative brands.

And while I'm sad Disney has retired Bear, I have a feeling big epic things are in store.

So yes, I definitely like the brands being split. The outcome is one that in the longrun is beneficial. I mean there was Gonzo with Elmo and Zoe last year so a Muppet Family Christmas crossover sort of thing isn't impossible.

I personally feel companies get way too loosey goosey with "spoofs" and copyrights. I love satires and random references,
but I mean...robot chicken cant even have an action figure line as its ALL "spoofs" of copyrighted properties(usually without the consent of those they spoof)

 

[beaker]

So Ernie and bert aren't Leagal Wow thats a first! lol

Eh, "legal" can be bent. Palisades came out with an unlicenced Indiana Jones Kermit figure.

 

[dwayne1115]

HA! I was trying to make a joke that at the time made me laugh my head off, but raeading t know makes no since.

I also never understood why they did a grown up Indy Kermit, he never dressed like that except on Muppet Babies. I would have loved to see them do some Muppet Baby toys, even though i would more then likely not buy any.

Now back to the comic! With or with a Bert and Ernie look-a likes this is going to really be great, because from the looks of it they are trying to bring some of the Muppets that have not been in the spot light, and let them shine once again!