As noted in the previous item, Stan Lee has won the first scuffle in a lawsuit against Marvel Comics over profits relating to the Spider-Man movies. A couple of folks have written to ask what, if anything, this means for Spider-Man's co-creator, Steve Ditko. I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV, but I'm pretty sure the answer is "Nothing," apart from some possible resentment. Stan's lawsuit, as I understand it, had nothing really to do with his status as co-creator of the character. He was not claiming ownership of the web-headed one or claiming that as co-creator he was entitled to anything…so there's no precedent here which could affect Ditko.
Stan's claim was a pretty simple contractual matter flowing from his employment deals with Marvel. His attorneys were claiming that one of those contracts stipulated he would receive certain sums of cash, if and when these movies were made. They sued, claiming he had not received the specified payments. If I read Marvel's response correctly, they're prepared to appeal based on some different interpretations of how the profits are to be calculated and which exploitations of the property are subject to Stan's cut. In other words, they're going to drag it out and argue every semi-colon, hoping Lee will see the wisdom of settling for a lesser sum. One suspects that no matter how things go, Smilin' Stan will be smilin' all the way to the Automated Teller.
And like I said, none of this relates to Mr. Ditko in any way. The dispute is about a specific contract Stan had as an executive of the company, and Ditko never had such a contract. In a just and benevolent world, the company would long since have loaded all their key creators down with hefty pensions and cash awards…but we rarely dwell in such a universe. I'm not saying it's right because, obviously, I don't think it is right. Alas, so many things are not.