If you are a fan of Marvel and/or are not up to date on the first 5 episodes of the new series WandaVision, turn back now. Spoilers ahead. You have been warned.
Owning a character’s comic book rights does not automatically give a studio the right to use that character on screen. Prior to creating it's own film studio, Marvel’s licensing agreements shaped which characters could appear together and how their stories were told on film. It's possible that Disney’s acquisition of Fox could open the door for WandaVision to connect previously separate franchises. The business takeaway: an IP strategy should account for how licensing decisions can constrain future creative and commercial opportunities.
Did you know that Wolverine from the X-Men universe became an Avenger in 2005; a full 6 years before the first Avengers movie hit theatres? Or that Spiderman has been an Avenger since 1964; but he was not legally allowed to join his teammates onscreen for the first handful of movies that take place in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU)?
Screen vs Page
Why is that? The short answer is Intellectual Property rights, namely that Marvel Comics holds different copyright and trademark rights than Marvel Studios. So, a lot of the differences between character choices, backstories and plot development between the comic book and film iterations can be traced back to restrictions designed around IP.
Before they became a studio in their own right, Marvel licensed the film rights to a handful of their characters (such as X-men and Spiderman) to other studios. Meaning that despite owning the comic book rights to these characters, Marvel is legally prohibited from using or even mentioning some of their own characters on screen.
Just how big of an impact IP rights have had on character development is probably most prominent in that of Peter/Pietro Maximoff, who also goes by the superhero moniker Quicksilver. He represents a complicated middle ground of licensing and character development between Marvel and Fox studios.
Fox owns the rights to the X-men and has claim to the term “mutant” and the familial ties to the character Magneto. So, in order to have the character exist in the MCU, Marvel needed to rewrite the character’s history. Pietro is not referred to by his superhero name, nor is the term “mutant” used. Meaning that these two versions of this superhero exist in separate universes with separate character origin stories.
WandaVision opens the Multiverse
What does this have to do with WandaVision? Peter/Pietro/Quicksilver is the brother to Scarlet Witch (aka the titular Wanda) and Marvel’s iteration was killed off early on in the franchise. At the end of WandaVision’s fifth episode, we learn that Wanda has the ability to create and alter realities. Her existence in the sitcom universe of the television series is one such alternate reality. So, it is not outside the realm of possibility that Wanda’s brother Pietro could reappear. When he does, however, it is not the original actor from the MCU, but rather the actor who played the Peter/Pietro/Quicksilver who exists in the X-men movies.
After watching the first 5 episodes, I spent part of my weekend deep diving into the mythology of the MCU and what possibilities this revelation about WandaVision creates for the larger Marvel Multiverse.
Since acquiring Fox Studios, the rights to the X-men characters have reverted back to Marvel. It’s possible that Marvel could use Wanda’s ability to create alternate realities to bridge these two franchises together. A fellow enthusiast posited that the appearance of X-Men’s Quicksilver may be the Easter egg that will blend Fox’s X-men universe with the MCU, thus creating the Marvel Multiverse.
What Can You Learn from Wanda?
Whether or not WandaVision becomes the bridge between these franchises, the theory highlights a practical IP lesson: licensing decisions made for today’s opportunities can shape tomorrow’s creative possibilities. Protecting what you have created is only part of the strategy. Leaving room to develop, adapt and combine those assets matters too.
Before licensing your IP, consider which rights you need to retain for future formats, markets or collaborations. Clearly defined scope, exclusivity and duration, along with provisions for renegotiation or rights reversion where appropriate, can help preserve that flexibility. Revisit those agreements as your business evolves, so yesterday’s decisions do not unnecessarily limit your next idea.
A thoughtful IP strategy supports both protection and possibility and might save you from the headache of having to strategize around licensing issues. Connect with our team to explore how your IP agreements can support today’s business needs while leaving room for tomorrow’s creativity.
[This blog post was published more than a year ago. Some information may no longer be current.]