Carl Barks and Nat'l Geographic

Frank Stajano fms at uk.research.att.com
Fri Sep 29 12:39:53 CEST 2000


On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Frank Stajano wrote:

> At 2000-09-27 18:39 +0200, Francesco Spreafico wrote:
> >Alberto Becattini in an article included in Zio Paperone #106 gives a couple
> >of examples:
> >
> >National Geographic April 1940 and October 1941 --> Donald Duck and the
> >Mummy Ring (Four Color Comic #29, September 1943)
> 
> This is the stuff originally pointed out in volume 1(1) of the CBL by, if I 
> remember correctly, Ault and Andrae in an extensive and well-researched 
> article/interview.

My recollection was not 100% accurate, so here are the details after 
checking. The article was indeed at the end of Set 1 Volume 1, but it was
by Andrae and Blum, while Ault was a coauthor of the interview from which
excerpts are quoted throughout the article.

I also checked the ZP 106 and was outraged that the article there is
signed Becattini but has no mention of the original CBL article or its
authors. All the National Geographic photographs have a credit to the NG
and the photographer in the margin, despite having been reproduced from
the CBL and not from the original magazine (presumably to avoid litigation
from NG); but dead silence about the substance of the essay. The only
mention of CBL in the article is in the caption of the Mummy's ring
*cover* that Carl Barks did for the slipcase to set 1.

This is not the first time I see something like this happening. As a
scientist and author I find it appalling.

I am aware (having been in that situation myself) that Disney grabs all
sorts of rights on the stuff done by its licencees. But even this has its
limitations. It means they can reuse that material without PAYING the
original authors; it isn't a blanket licence for plagiarism.

    Frank   (filologo disneyano)  http://www.uk.research.att.com/~fms






More information about the DCML mailing list