Marvel, Disney Sued Over ‘Iron Man’ Armor for Copyright Infringement

Comic book artists claim Tony Stark’s suit was lifted from their design

Iron Man Suit

Tony Stark has a new battle to face — this time in the courts.

In a lawsuit filed in federal court in Massachusetts on Thursday, a pair of comic book artists claims that the suit worn in the “Iron Man” movies infringes on their work from the comic-book series “Radix.”

Brothers Ben and Ray Lai, owners of Horizon Comics Productions, claim that the characters in “Radix,” much like Iron Man, wear “highly detailed, mechanized suits of body armor.”

“In the Films, Iron Man is depicted wearing mechanized body armor that appropriates the copyrighted artistic work of the Plaintiff without authorization or attribution,” the suit, which names Marvel Entertainment, Marvel Studios, The Walt Disney Company and others, reads.

According to the suit, the “Radix” series was created by the Lai brothers in 2001, and the following year the pair was hired by Marvel “to work as artists on its various comic book franchises.”

The complaint singles out the Iron Man outfit of the movie franchise, claiming that the comics “typically depicted Iron Man wearing simple spandex-like attire and minimal armor,” where the movie franchise depicts Iron Man “wearing a fully mechanized suit of armor” which becomes increasingly complex over the span of the films.

“The plot of each ‘Iron Man’ film centers on the protagonist as he creates and builds increasingly powerful and futuristic versions of this body armor … that allow him to fly, shoot projectiles, and perform other superhuman feats,” the suit reads.

Marvel and Disney have not yet responded to TheWrap‘s request for comment.

The lawsuit notes that the “Iron Man” films have “grossed nearly $4 billion worldwide.”

Alleging copyright infringement and unfair and deceptive trade practices, the suit is seeking unspecified damages and a permanent injunction barring further alleged copyright infringement.

Pamela Chelin contributed to this report.

Comments