Judge Decides X-Men Aren't Human

An anonymous reader points to this Wall Street Journal article, writing "According to the U.S. Court of International Trade, the X-Men (along with other figures from the Marvel universe) aren't human. The presiding judge subjected the figures to "comprehensive examinations" which included "the need to remove the clothes of the figure." Ironically, the X-Men, whose struggle for human acceptance has been a key theme in the series, were more easily classified as non-human than Kraven and Mole Man.

Comments

Deeply, deeply ironic...

[Malfourmed]

...that the X-Men fight to have themselves accepted as human in their principle-driven comic book world, while their owners and masters fight to have the opposite declared in the dollar-uber-alles real world.

<comic geek pedant mode>

It's Spider-Man, not Spiderman

</cgpm>

And Superman was never human - he was always Kryptonian!

Overfuckinglawyered.

[Tackhead]

Overlawyered. Overfuckingregulated.

OK kids. A 32-page ruling on whether or not the X-Men are human or non-human, due to a 6.8% vs 12% import duty differential charged seven years ago, a duty that isn't even in effect anymore.

How many hundreds of thousands (millions?) of dollars got spent on lawyers - both from Marvel's shareholders for their lawyers and our tax dollars being spent on the Government's lawyers - in the case leading up to this ruling - a ruling that took seven years after the initial dispute hit the courts?

In the world of the X-Men, something would have broken by now, but the real world has no superheroes to save us.

Isn't it time we called our Congressmen/women and demanded, on pain of our voting for third parties, that they put the tax law genie back in the bottle?

Anyone? Bueller?

Re:Overfuckinglawyered.

[ChristTrekker]

It's also the corporations' fault. Every time they try to levy a standard tax the lobbyists come out and beg, wheedle, and bribe to get loopholes in the law. They should just set a standard import/ export tax, no exceptions.

True, that's what they (corps) do. But it's our fault for voting such pushovers into office. Elect some people that stand for principle over politics and you'll get fair across-the-board standards.

As long as the 16th Amendment allows the gov't to squeeze "the rich" for whatever they want to give it to "the poor", they can continue to buy their votes in November. As long as they have the power of office, they will continue to get money from corps for these special favors. And as long as the 17th Amendment removes State gov'ts from having any balancing influence at the federal level, nothing will change. Money and power are powerful and perverse incentives.

However, the solution isn't "campaign finance reform" or "term limits". Some of the most expensive races are US Senate, which removing the 17th Amendment would solve. Besides, we ought to be able to spend our money how we please. There's been more money in politics now since the "reforms" of the 70's than before. And we already have term limits - you get to "vote the bums out" every November. What we need is voting method reform so that we have a real choice, so that non-Dem/Rep votes make a difference.

Re:Non human?

[nucal]

and did the Judge need to perform a "comprehensive examination" of her including removing her clothes?

I think that Ken and Barbie would be non-human by this criterion ...

what about barbie?

[gmack]

"The judge found that Kraven exhibited "highly exaggerated muscle tone in arms and legs.""

This begs the question .. if exaggerated musles make craven nonhuman than what about Barbie's extremely small waist size?

Superman is not SUPPOSED to be human!

[Andy_R]

According to the plot of Superman, he shares no DNA with us, he just happens to be roughly the same shape because evolution on Kryton followed a Parallel path.

On the other hand, Spider-man IS human, in fact according to the plot of the comic, he was a perfectly normal person up to the point in the story that he was bitten. Peter Parker dolls definitely should have been subject to the tax, according to the (admittedly very dumb) rules.

Re:Superman is not SUPPOSED to be human!

[Jace of Fuse!]

You are correct. Very dumb rules indeed. Think about the precedent this is going to set.

Picard and Riker dolls = Human
Data and Worf = Not Human

Tax the first two, but not the second?

Or how about this...

Alien from Venus Barbi...?

This rule leaves too many loopholes, and more importantly doesn't explain WHY something that is "Human" should be taxed more than something that is, say, "Something Else".

If something is superhuman (such as Spiderman) does it get supertaxed?

Superman Not Human, *gasp

[limekiller4]

From the article:
Veteran comics fan Christian Cooper, who once worked as a Marvel editor, thinks Judge Barzilay got carried away. If Kraven isn't human, what about the twisted villains in Dick Tracy? Or worse yet, Superman himself? "Here's a guy who changes his clothes in a phone booth and flies through the air," says Mr. Cooper. "Does that mean he's now an animal?"

No, he's Kryptonian you nitwit. What a kneejerk reaction!

THIS IS OVER IMPORT DUTIES CLASSIFICATION FOR CRIPES SAKE! Who gives a groundhog's fanny if they call Superman a "cup of water with a straw hanging off the end?"

Re:It's not a big deal

[ndogg]

Firstly, Magneto has it wrong, Mutants are humans since they can interbreed with any Homo-sapien on the Marvel earth. They would be better classified as the only other race of Homo-sapiens (NB "races" such as Caucasian, Indian, Hispanic, etc. don't really exist because there isn't enough differences in the genetics for such races to exist within the definition of biology.)

Secondly, you're right, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter all that much, but it's still something to be upset about. The X-Men, for many people, aren't merely characters in a great piece of fiction, but also a metaphor for those in humanity who have felt the sting of oppression by fellow human beings.

This comic also shows that oppressed people are still human. Being oppressed does not necessarily provide justification for all actions used to break that oppression. The comic shows the complexity of human nature and its affairs, rather than trying to make clear distinctions between good and evil.

A link to the Judge's 32-page opinion (plus mine)

[LinuxParanoid]

I went to see if I could find Judge's opinion online. Indeed, it is! In PDF form, I bring you Toy Biz, Inc. v. United States.

For those of you decrying our taxpayer dollars going to waste on such a suit, it appears some at least is being used to make such decisions more accessible, a fact which I hope we can all agree upon.

Personally, I think it was worth every penny to expose a fantastic example of corporate hypocracy. I read maybe a dozen X-Men comics (and didn't see the movie) and the main philosophical point I saw that the series revolved around (besides raw action) was that the X-Men should in fact be considered human despite their 'mutant' powers.

Given that, what could be more hypocritical than turning around and claiming that, while for storyline purposes the X-Men should be considered human, but for tax purposes, they are not.

But maybe I should read the Judge's opinion first. It's long, so I'm posting the link here before I read. Based on the first paragraph, it looks like the matter never went to a full trial and was decided in a pre-trial 'summary judgement'.

--LP