The Spider-Man movie series can be a bit confusing. Not only do audiences have to contend with an ever-expanding list of films (which date back to the 1970s), but they are also faced with the question of who owns Spider-Man?
Sony has produced a string of Spidey movies, beginning with 2002’s Spider-Man, and continues to produce films such as Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) and Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019). But Marvel Studios also produce films featuring Spidey, including Captain America: Civil War (2016) and Avengers: Endgame (2019) – so who owns what?!
In this post, I will explain the rights issues surrounding the Spider-Man movies, to provide an understanding of who owns the character on and off the big screen.
___
Who owns Spider-Man?
To understand the rights issue surrounding Spider-Man, I need to break the character down into three different categories: Spider-Man in comics, Spider-Man on film, and Spider-Man merchandise.
- If Spider-Man appears in comics it is under the control of Marvel Comics (and Disney – the parent company of Marvel Comics). So, Marvel/Disney owns the rights to Spider-Man comics.
- If Spider-Man appears on film it is under the control of Sony Pictures. Sony owns the rights to Spider-Man movies.
- Spider-Man merchandise is owned and controlled by Marvel Comics (and Disney – the parent company of Marvel Comics). So, Marvel/Disney own the rights to Spider-Man merchandise.
___
Why is there a shared ownership over Spider-Man?
In 1998, ten years before Marvel Studios released Iron Man (2008), Marvel Comics sold the movie rights to Spider-Man to Sony Pictures. Marvel Comics was keen to put Spider-Man on the big screen and at that point in time it did not have its own movie studio to help it achieve its goals.
The deal would grant Sony the opportunity to produce as many Spider-Man (or Spider-Man-related) movies as it so desired. The only stipulation being that it had to produce a new movie every five years.
When the deal was made it was for the film rights as well as merchandising (more on this later) – it did not include Spidey’s comic book career. Therefore, Marvel Comics could continue to publish Spider-Man stories, while Sony could make Spidey movies and produce Spider-Man merchandise.
With the deal in place, Sony began to produce movies in the early ‘00s, including Spider-Man (2002), Spider-Man 2 (2004) and Spider-Man 3 (2007) – all of which were box office hits. Meanwhile, Marvel Comics published countless comics featuring Spider-Man, including One More Day, and Civil War amongst others.
___
Do publishers always sell the rights to their characters?
Publishers selling movie rights to characters is not uncommon, so it was not out of the ordinary in 1998 for Marvel Comics to make a deal with Sony. In fact, at the time, Marvel Comics made a number of deals with movie studios to help put characters into cinemas, including the X-Men, Daredevil, the Hulk, Ghost Rider and many more.
As mentioned above, in 1998 Marvel did not have a film division and therefore needed the help of a studio to produce movies based on its characters. Had the company not made this deal, or any other deal regarding Spider-Man, then from 2008 onward the character could have appeared in movies produced by Marvel Studios.
___
Why does Sony still own the film rights to Spider-Man?
As part of a licensing deal, when studios option a character from a publisher they have a certain amount of time with which to produce a movie. If they do not produce a movie within this allotted time then the rights to the character revert back to the owner.
In the case of Sony and Spider-Man, the studio has a five-year window with which to make a Spidey movie. So long as Sony continues to produce Spider-Man movies every five years it is able to retain the rights.
If you have ever wondered why there have been so many Spider-Man movies over the past few years it is because of this contractual obligation. The moment that Sony fails to meet its production window is the moment that the rights to Spider-Man revert back to Marvel.
This situation has happened with some of Marvel’s other characters when they were licensed out to studios. Ghost Rider, the Punisher, Man-Thing and a number of others have all found their way back to Marvel after their respective deals came to an end (i.e. when the studios ran out of time).
___
Will Sony ever give up the rights to Spider-Man?
Unless anything significant happens to affect the financial situation of the studio, Sony is unlikely to stop producing Spider-Man movies. All of the films have been box office successes, even if some of the movies (i.e. The Amazing Spider-Man movies) did not do as well as the studio had hoped.
If Sony was ever to give Spider-Man back to Marvel – and legally it has done nothing wrong by making the movies – it would have been around 2014/2015, following the release of The Amazing Spider-Man 2. The film was viewed by Sony as a springboard for various Spider-Man movie spinoffs, but none of them came to pass when it was met with a lukewarm reception.
It was at this point in time when Sony had to make a very important decision about Spider-Man’s cinematic career. Continue producing Spider-Man films that may not succeed at the box office or take a break and potentially lose the film rights to the character – what was the studio to do?
In an unexpected move, a decision was made to work with Marvel. Sony partnered with Marvel Studios to produce Spider-Man movies, therefore maintaining its association with the character.
___
Why are Marvel/Disney and Sony working together on Spider-Man movies?
In 2015, Sony struck a deal with Marvel Studios/Disney that would allow both studios to benefit from Spider-Man. The deal would allow Marvel Studios access to Spider-Man, for inclusion in its hugely successful run of Avenger movies, and in exchange Marvel Studios would co-produce Sony’s Spider-Man films.
It was a win-win situation for both studios. Marvel Studios was keen to have Spider-Man take part in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and Sony was keen to keep Spider-Man on the big screen.
Now of course, Marvel Studios could have simply left Sony to its own devices in the hope that eventually the studio would give up the rights, but this was unlikely. Spider-Man movies – even potentially bad ones – have the power to make money, so Sony could have simply carried on rebooting the character over and over again in order to retain the rights.
But this isn’t good for the brand. Spider-Man is Marvel Comics’ flagship character, so Marvel was keen not to let the wall-crawler lose favour with fans. It also knew that having some access to Spidey was better than having no access at all.
___
What was the Sony/Marvel Studios deal?
The deal that was struck between Sony and Marvel allowed Marvel Studios to use Spider-Man in a select number of its films, which included Captain America: Civil War (2016), Avengers: Infinity War (2018), and Avengers: Endgame (2019). Spidey would appear as a guest star in the movies (not as the lead), but Marvel could pretty much use the character however it wanted.
In exchange, Marvel Studios would co-produce a series of Spider-Man solo movies in association with Sony. These movies would be Sony’s property; however, Marvel Studios would receive 5% of the box office.
In essence, Marvel would get Spider-Man back on a temporary basis and Sony would benefit from having Spidey associated with the MCU – a multi-billion dollar success story.
The two films that Marvel Studios co-produced were Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) – which made over $880 million – and Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019) – which made more than $1.1 billion!
___
How long does the Sony/Marvel Studios deal stay in place?
The deal had a finite lifespan, but in essence it could remain in place until such time as either studio decided to part ways – and in 2019 that almost happened. In August 2019 the partnership temporarily dissolved when renegotiations fell apart.
However, after a bit of discussion – and a little intervention from Spider-Man actor, Tom Holland – a new deal was struck and Marvel Studios and Sony moved forward together. This new deal allowed Spider-Man to continue to appear in the MCU for at least one more film, with Marvel Studios agreeing to co-produce another Tom Holland Spider-Man movie in return.
___
What happens when Marvel Studios and Sony decide to part ways over Spider-Man?
If or when Marvel Studios and Sony decide to dissolve their Spider-Man partnership, the original deal will come back into play. Sony will retain the rights to produce Spider-Man movies, so long as they do it within the five-year window.
The difference this time around is that since 2018, Sony has been busy developing its own cinematic universe which revolves around Spider-Man movie spin-offs. Venom (2018) was the first entry, which proved to be a huge box-office success, and this was followed by the Academy Award-winning animated movie, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018).
Sony’s cinematic universe is being developed so that in the future, the studio does not have to rely so heavily on films featuring Peter Parker. If these films continue to be successful, their association to Spider-Man will be enough to ensure Sony retains the Spider-Man movie rights.
___
Does Sony still own the rights to Spider-Man merchandise?
When Sony bought the film rights to Spider-Man in 1998, the deal included Spider-Man merchandise rights – an incredibly lucrative source of income. While the movies make a huge amount of money at the box office, the merchandise rights can (and often do) make even more.
But in 2011, when Sony was in need of a cash injection, it made the decision to sell the merchandising rights back to Marvel. And in doing so, Sony now only has the rights to make movies – it does not get a slice of the toy/apparel pie.
Speaking via the Wall Street Journal in September 2017, Sony’s Chief Financial Officer, Kenichiro Yoshida, said: “We had sold some assets of the studio, such as merchandising rights of Spider-Man, to raise short-term cash in exchange for long-term cash flow when the electronics units were struggling.”
This move was something which Sony needed to do in order to keep the studio running, but it has cost it in the long-run. Sony might receive the majority of the box office returns from each Spidey picture, but Marvel/Disney is still making a killing from the merchandise.
___
Should Sony give the Spider-Man rights back to Marvel?
Ever since Marvel began developing its own films via Marvel Studios, many fans have been vocal in suggesting that Sony should give the Spider-Man movie rights back to Marvel – but should the studio do this?
Legally, Sony does not have to give the rights back to Spider-Man, unless it fails to produce Spidey movies within the allotted time. The studio entered into a legal contract with Marvel during the late ‘90s – no one forced Marvel to sell the character – and Sony is well within its rights to continue producing Spider-Man movies as per the terms of the agreement.
While some will argue that Spider-Man movies should be under the control of Spidey’s publisher, Sony has made both a financial and a critical success of the Spider-Man movies, suggesting general audiences are largely happy with the films so far. Not every decision will be met with fan approval, and Sony has discarded a few Spidey pictures over the years – including Spider-Man 4, The Amazing Spider-Man 3, and Silver & Black – but it has still managed to keep Spidey on the big screen throughout.
___
I hope this information on the Marvel / Sony Spider-Man rights has proved useful to you. Please feel free to share the information as you see fit.
Should you wish to know more about the Spider-Man movie series, please take a look around this blog. Alternatively, take a look at one of the recommended reads below.
Read more:
Don't Tell Harry 
23 Responses to Who owns Spider-Man: Sony or Marvel?
Thanks. This is helpful information.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Beautifully compiled, to the point, accurate, unambiguous, thorough and well written. I ended up reading the whole composition even though I got the information I needed within the first paragraph. Thoroughly enjoyed it, the writer has mastered the art of information giving. Become a teacher, my friend, schools need you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
🙂
LikeLike
But why in every Spider-Man movie (include Venom movie), there is a mention like (Spider-Man and related characters copyright Marvel)
LikeLike
Because the characters originated in Marvel Comics. As such, they are Marvel Comics characters, which are licensed out to Sony/Columbia for use in movies only.
Marvel owns the copyright to the characters, and uses them however it sees fit in comics, cartoons, and toys, but under a licensing agreement with Sony, the characters that appear in films are owned by Sony, until such time as the rights revert back to Marvel.
LikeLike
Does Sony need to pay a royalties to Marvel Comics for each Spider-man movie ? (I seen somewhere that Sony pay a royalties to Marvel)
In all Spider-man movies (the first triology, amazing spider-man,Venom and into spider-verse) all say “in cooperation with Marvels comics” what does it mean ?
Does Marvel have the right of Black Monkey ?
Can Marvel use Spider-man in TV series or cartoon ?
So if yes Can Marvel use Spider-man in TV series that it can be in MCU or create comics or cartoons with Spider-man who set up in Earth-19999 (the universe of MCU)
Sorry for my questions, You are the only person who defines the spider-man right very well
and sorry for my english I’m not english native speaker
thanks
LikeLike
That’s a lot of question, but I will try to answer them to the best of my knowledge.
Marvel Studios and Sony currently have a deal in which they co-produce the Tom Holland Spider-Man movies. Under this deal, they both get a share of royalties, although Sony’s share is much larger.
With regards to the original trilogy and every other Spider-Man movie you mention the disclaimer is included as Spider-Man (and associated characters) are still owned by Marvel Comics. Marvel Comics licensed Spider-Man’s film rights to Sony during the ’90s, and although this means Sony can do what they wish with the character in film, they are still in partnership with Marvel and so credit the company accordingly.
With regard to the Black Monkey/Night Monkey character, its a bit of grey area, but I don’t believe Marvel would own this character. This disguise for Parker exists in a Sony Spider-Man movie, so in theory it would fall under Sony’s jurisdiction.
Marvel’s deal with Sony does not include TV or cartoons (although it once did), so Marvel can use Spider-Man as it sees fit across these platforms. In fact, if you look on Disney+ you will see a contemporary Spider-Man cartoon.
With regard to a live-action TV series, I believe Marvel could create a live-action show, but this would not happen anytime soon – and unlikely to with Tom Holland. Holland is signed up to appear in Sony’s Spider-Man films (and by arrangement in Marvel Studio’s MCU movies).
Following on from my answer to your previous question, Marvel is unlikely to make an MCU Spider-Man television series. It would confuse general audiences who follow the Spider-Man movies, plus it would cause further problems between the Sony/Marvel Studios partnership. They also are unlikely to make an MCU version of Spider-Man to appear in comics. The Sony/Marvel deal only exists for as long as both companies find common ground, the partnership could dissolve again in a few years, and as long as Sony continues making Spider-Man movies Marvel Studios would not have a say in the direction of the character. As such, Marvel Comics would not spend time creating MCU Spidey comics for a character they have no control over.
I hope this answers your questions. Don’t apologise for your English – it was fine. 🙂
LikeLike
You explain everything perfectly. Thanks
LikeLiked by 1 person
This article is so perfectly executed. Absolutely precise and concise. You answered every question I could possibly have about this topic.
Thank you, Alex Wiggan!
LikeLike
Thank you for the feedback. 🙂
LikeLike
So what happens in the case when Marvel creates a brand new character in the Spider-verse? With the new addition of Knull as a character in 2018 and the Spider-verse’s version of Thanos, would Sony have to strike a deal with Disney to be able to use his character?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The specifics of this arrangement exist in a bit of a grey area – as Marvel may have worked out a new arrangement since recently partnering more closely with Sony, but yes, if it’s a character created in a Spider-Man book, then Sony would get the use of it. Knull first appeared in Venom comics, so it should follow the same arrangement.
A few years back, Marvel stopped publishing Fantastic Four comics. At the time, it was heavily suggested this was because the company was unhappy with 20th Century Fox’s treatment of the FF. By not publishing new FF comics, Marvel could ensure it was not creating new characters that would fall under Fox ownership.
During this same period of time, X-Men comics continued, even though Fox had the movie rights to this property too, but Marvel reduced the focus of the X-Men in the Marvel Universe and instead tried to make Inhumans just as popular (it didn’t work).
In more recent times, since Disney bought out 20th Century Fox, the X-Men & Fantastic Four comics have regained their prominence on the comic book shelves. Anything that is created in these books now, remains the property of Marvel, so there’s no issue.
Now you may wonder, ‘well, if Sony get use of newly created Spider-Man characters, why create new characters in the first place?’ Well, the reason for this is because Spidey is one of Marvel Comics more popular titles, so it wouldn’t make business sense to just put restrictions on the comics for this character. Plus, it could damage the current relationship with Sony, which is working well at the moment. Who knows what the future holds.
LikeLike
Hi Alex, great article and great info. There is one thing that I’m still not clear on. Who owns the video games? Specifically the 2018 game. It’s a PlayStation exclusive (Spider-Man will also be a PlayStation exclusive character in the Avengers game, and not on the Xbox version). Since Sony owns PlayStation, I assumed that was the reason for the exclusivity. But that was before I realized that Sony only owns the rights to the movies, and not the comics or merchandise. Unless I’m mistaken (correct me if I’m wrong), video games would fall under the category of merchandise. So why is Spider-Man and PlayStation exclusive character if the game rights are owned my Marvel/Disney?
LikeLike
This is a good question and it’s important to note that while 2018’s Spider-Man game is exclusive to Sony PlayStation, the character isn’t exclusive to Sony. If you look at the Marvel Alliance games they feature Spidey but are available on multiple platforms including Nintendo Switch etc.
My understanding here is that the developer of the Spidey game, Insomnia, were given the opportunity by Marvel to develop a game based on one of their characters. Insomnia chose Spidey and then developed the game around him. When it came time to publish the game, they published it through Sony’s software division, which allowed Sony to retain an exclusivity for PS4 & PS5.
LikeLike
[…] is the fact that technically, the Sony Spider-Verse movies are not part of the MCU. Due to the complex rights issues, the MCU can use Peter Parker, but Sony takes other […]
LikeLike
[…] video games, toys, merchandise, film rights … they can each be sold to different entities. In the case of Spider-man, his film rights belong to Sony (as the result of a sale in 1998). There was a similar deal of […]
LikeLike
[…] video games, toys, merchandise, film rights … they can each be sold to different entities. In the case of Spider-man, his film rights belong to Sony (as the result of a sale in 1998). There was a similar deal of […]
LikeLike
Dude, Thanks a ton! That’s the best explanation I can find on the internet. And I never leave comments on any page before, this is my first time so to make you know that your work is appreciated.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you – and your comment is appreciated too. 🙂
LikeLike
Man that’s a wonderful article. So complete on every point
LikeLike
[…] 2015, Marvel and Sony made an unprecedented deal that the two companies would share joint-ownership in Spider-Man’s copyright. Marvel would […]
LikeLike
Good day, Sir. If you could dedicate a new post/page then hopefully.
As of 2023, since “Peter Parker” is forgotten in the whole universe, what if Marvel/Disney have Tom Holland’s character adopt a new identity and superhero alter ego and variant costume close to his previous, in-universe?
If so then, it would easy for fans/audience worldwide to absorb since it would still be a continuation and not a retcon. It would still be the same him. So a bit like Robin becomes Nightwing. Maybe even adopt something already existing in the comics. While Sony would as usual have their film Spidey.
It would also be a win-win for Marvel/Disney, don’t you think, as they would still have the Spidey cash cow and a new one born from Tom Holland’s same character from the MCU films. So the MCU would NOT be without Spider-Man because he’s still there, just a Robin-to-Nightwing-like transition. Sony could finally have their film Miles or maybe get back Andrew Garfield to reprise the role.
The hurdles could be vanquished, with Sony having their most desired own Spidey/Peter Parker (like maybe Miles or a returning Garfield), while the MCU continues on with the same Tom Holland char. So it would not be confusing like Warner which have The Batman and Batfleck in the same era of ours, even two Jokers, with a potential third for the The Batman counterpart. Marvel/Disney would eventually “retire” Spider-Man/Peter Marker in the MCU, just like they did with the immensely popular Iron Man/Tony Stark, and what fitting way to do it in universe. Even beloved Hugh’s Wolvie/Logan got retired a while back.
Does Sony have the right to prevent Marvel, to prevent to have another with the same powers. Would it be just an exploitable loophole like having another to have the same healing factor as Logan’s and Wade’s. Also MCU film Eternals’ Ikaris who moves and flies like Superman, including eye beams, very similar don’t you think? If Superman is CGI’d over some of Ikaris’ fight scenes, he’d be a direct Superman no prob. Unlike if you would CGI Supes over say Wolvierine, then it wouldn’t work out and totally weird.
Would such work and finally give Marvel free rein? What do you think? Would it such be like an exploitable loophole? Thanks in advance.
LikeLike
As a workaround, Marvel Comics could even purposefully create a new character/superhero in comics, like a mini series of only 4 issues, unrelated to the Spidey world, say related to the Avengers or FF4 instead. Say a certain John Doe with this powers similar to Spidey’s, but of different costume and story.
Therefore Tom’ Holland’s “forgotten” character could then adopt that John Doe, just like Ant-Man’s villain Darren Cross was given MODOK, an entirely different character separate from the Darren Cross villain in the comics.
Sony only have film adaptation right/license, right, and not the IP? So would the workaround above work? So the “new” Tom Holland character could then for example tweak his webbing to have a different look, say a more smooth one and of different color just like what it would be in the John Doe workaround comics.
Of course Marvel (and us) wanted an actual Spider-Man/Peter Parker back then to be in the MCU to be finally alongside the other heroes, but since they (and we) already got it and after the many appearances.
Marvel/Disney likely can’t rely on a shackle forever, just like there was that hurdle back then which almost prevented Spidey to appear again in the MCU. Just imagine if something similar happens again in the future, what then? What if there would be no positive results anymore. And so, the cash cow remains a cash cow, with a potential to have another one.
Thanks again.
LikeLike