>>83902035You do understand that he hasn't been Captain Marvel since DC forced his owners, Fawcett, to stop publishing him in 1953.
They didn't even rent him until 1972, and they didn't buy his rights fully until 1977. This whole retarded argument is one that came about because someone working for DC in the early 1970s remembered that there had been a Captain Marvel before, and that it had sold well, but not that they'd sued it into oblivion. They didn't bother to consult a lawyer who would have told them that no, Marvel Comics would not have to give up the name for any reason, and no, DC could never legally own the trademark. They didn't remember that the main reason Fawcett cancelled the title was that it had always been their best-seller and it just wasn't selling by the 1950s, because it was unpopular, so they couldn't use the profits to fund a legal defense against DC's predatory suit.
So because some guy had too many beers at lunch in 1972 DC and later Warner Bros. ended up spending literally millions of dollars on a worthless property, and a protracted and doomed legal fight to convince a court that DC somehow owned the name to a character they hadn't originated and had killed off, and then even more on a legally binding settlement that agrees that DC has no rights to the name whatsoever. Even the live action tv show called him Shazam, and that was 40 years ago.
When are you going to grow up.
