Quote Originally Posted by Tawmis View Post
No. And that's my point. Why would Disney sit on making an X-Men movie, because Fox has the rights to Marvel's mutants?
As a way to get around it, they're making Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver Inhumans in Avengers.
We have seen already that the Terigan Mist or whatever - has restored mutant powers to MANY mutants who lost their powers thanks to Scarlet Witch's "No More Mutants."
Is it a far stretch to say - the mist restored these powers - because they were mutants? And those humans, who have recently gained powers, did so because they had the "X" factor in their genes (let's not call it the Mutant Gene). And the Mist simply awakened their powers.
And thus, couldn't we logically say, that all "mutants" are indeed Inhumans?
Is that such a far leap?
I think not.
No, but it would still be completely pointless. Retroactively calling them Inhumans isn't going to magically let Marvel Studios make movies about X-Men characters, that's not how licensing works. They can use Quicksilver specifically because he's an Avengers character every bit as much as he's an X-Men character and so fell into a tricky grey area regarding who can and can't use him. They're not allowed to use the twins BECAUSE they're not calling them mutants, mutantdom is just the one PART of them that Fox inextricably owns. Just because you say "turns out Gambit was an Inhuman all along" doesn't make him eligible for Avengers 3, he's still an X-Men character and Fox still owns the movie rights to him.

So no, while it wouldn't be IMPOSSIBLE for Marvel to rebrand the entire X-Men line (not even remotely close to 'cancelling' it, as this thread starting out by saying), it would be completely pointless and would only serve to hurt their sales by completely altering a flagship property, in name if nothing else. If all McDonalds changed all their signs to Burgerville overnight, it probably wouldn't go so well. Branding counts for a lot. It's never gonna happen.