Kirby’s legacy

Jack Kirby’s heirs have told Marvel that they’re revoking the copyright Kirby granted back in the seventies for the various creations he’d provided them. Marvel (and Disney, which now owns Marvel) is fighting back, arguing that Kirby was doing work-for-hire so all rights belong to the company.
The article at the link speculates that the probable outcome will be the heirs regranting the copyrights for the indefinite future, in return for a hefty payout. There’s also discussion in the comments of whether the heirs could yank anything away (Stan Lee apparently accepted a deal giving his share of the copyrights to Marvel, so that might mean the heirs are only co-owners at best) and one deliciously sneaky (though highly improbable) suggestion that this would give Disney some legal ground for revoking other studios’ Marvel licenses.
But what really struck me was the comments attacking the heirs for even trying this:
What right do they have to the money? They didn’t create anything!
Kirby’s kids should be grateful Marvel enabled him to support them all those years and just shut up!
Kirby’s kids should be grateful Marvel is keeping their father’s creations in the public eye and just shut up!
I won’t bother refuting the points (the other comments at the link do that), but it’s unsettling that so many people side with Disney/Marvel, even given that this is partly fansquawking (i.e., the primary concern is that their favorite comics or movie series will be shut down).
True, Kirby’s kids haven’t created anything, but neither have the suits at Disney (and while Joe Quesada at Marvel has done some creating, he certainly can’t claim credit for Kirby’s work). So why is it fairer for the company to get the millions than the heirs?
And to say the family should just be grateful Marvel deigned to pay their father for his work? It’s not like Marvel was performing an act of charity; hiring Kirby was a business transaction. He was talented and creative and made a lot more money for them than for himself. And he was a freelancer, not an employee creating on company time.
It’s the same tone I heard in a lot of right-wing pundits back when the auto companies were applying for bailouts: They’d mock the executives for pleading poverty after flying the company jet to DC, then conclude that the only fit punishment was to gut the union workers’ salaries! Why do those peons think they deserve more than their bosses want to pay them?
Maybe that explains why the working class (and the middle class too) keep falling further and further behind: There are too many people (outside the executive suite) who just assume that the free market is completely fair and if you’re losing out, it must be your fault.