Help support the Mego Museum
Help support the Mego Museum

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Update to Supes Rights case.. origin goes to heirs

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • 60'schild
    Silver Haired Silver Ager
    • Mar 27, 2009
    • 0

    Update to Supes Rights case.. origin goes to heirs

    Now this is interesting:

    http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...&cs=1&nid=2563

    Warner Bros. and DC Comics have lost a little more control over the Man of Steel.

    In an ongoing Federal court battle over Superman, Judge Stephen Larson ruled Wednesday that the family of the superhero's co-creator, Jerry Siegel, has "successfully recaptured" rights to additional works, including the first two weeks of the daily Superman newspaper comic-strips, as well as portions of early Action Comics and Superman comic-books.

    The ruling is based on the court's finding that these were not "works-made-for-hire" under the Copyright Act.

    This means the Siegels -- repped by Marc Toberoff of Toberoff & Associates -- now control depictions of Superman's origins from the planet Krypton, his parents Jor-El and Lora, Superman as the infant Kal-El, the launching of the infant Superman into space by his parents as Krypton explodes and his landing on Earth in a fiery crash.

    The first Superman story was published in 1938 in Action Comics No. 1. For $130, Jerry Siegel and co-creator Joel Shuster signed a release in favor of DC's predecessor, Detective Comics, and a 1974 court decision ruled they signed away their copyrights forever.

    In 2008, the same court order ruled on summary judgment that the Siegels had successfully recaptured (as of 1999) Siegel's copyright in Action Comics No. 1, giving them rights to the Superman character, including his costume, his alter-ego as reporter Clark Kent, the feisty reporter Lois Lane, their jobs at the Daily Planet newspaper working for a gruff editor, and the love triangle among Clark/Superman and Lois.

    While ownership of the Man of Steel is one point of all this legal activity, the real issue is money and how much Warner Bros. and DC owe the Siegels from profits they collected from Superman since 1999, when the heirs' recapture of Siegel's copyright became effective.

    DC owns other elements like Superman's ability to fly, the term kryptonite, the Lex Luthor and Jimmy Olsen characters, Superman's powers and expanded origins.

    In a statement, Warner Bros. and DC said, "Warner and DC Comics are pleased that the court has affirmed that the vast majority of key elements associated with the Superman character that were developed after Action Comics No. 1 are not part of the copyrights that the plaintiffs have recaptured and therefore remain solely owned by DC Comics."

    The Shuster estate originally did not participate with the Siegels' case because Shuster has no spouse or children. But his estate later won a ruling of a recapture identical to the Siegels, which will be effective in 2013. At that point, the Siegels and Shusters will own the entire copyright to Action Comics No. 1. That will give them the chance to set up Superman pics, TV shows and other projects at another studio.

    If they want to get a new "Superman" or even "Justice League" pic featuring the superhero, Warner Bros. and DC will be forced to go into production by 2011.
  • The Bat
    Batman Fanatic
    • Jul 14, 2002
    • 13412

    #2
    Interesting...let's hope we get a new Superman Movie out of the deal. WB have been sitting on their Butts long enough.
    sigpic

    Comment

    • jwyblejr
      galactic yo-yo
      • Apr 6, 2006
      • 11143

      #3
      If that's the case,shouldn't they have the rights to the name "Kal-L" not "Kal-El"?

      Comment

      • 60'schild
        Silver Haired Silver Ager
        • Mar 27, 2009
        • 0

        #4
        Just read on the comicblocforums (Geoff Johns' place) that someone is claiming to have heard that Marvel Comics approached the Siegels to attempt to buy out their half of the Superman rights recently.

        Now THAT would really get interesting.. (would never happen though, fingers crossed). Dan Didio would have a stroke on the spot.

        Comment

        • Earth 2 Chris
          Verbose Member
          • Mar 7, 2004
          • 32525

          #5
          Unless the Siegels just won't license or sell their half to DC/Warners out of spite, then you can guarantee Warners won't let Supes get away. They'll back a HUGE truck of money up to their door.

          Chris
          sigpic

          Comment

          • 60'schild
            Silver Haired Silver Ager
            • Mar 27, 2009
            • 0

            #6
            Agreed it is highly unlikely, but the image of that proverbial truck of money is very enticing! (at least for me, anyway!)

            Comment

            • Riffster
              Atomic batteries to power
              • Jun 29, 2008
              • 2487

              #7
              Marvel would absolutley destroy the Superman mythos, they'd make him abrooding/emo headcase.. oh wait they already have that.

              I have no faith in Marvel to handle an actual cape super hero.
              Looking for Infinite Heroes Robin and Catwoman
              And Super Powers Batman

              Comment

              • The Toyroom
                The Packaging King
                • Dec 31, 2004
                • 16653

                #8
                This is getting ridiculous.....someone please make the Siegels and Shusters just go away....IMO they had their day in the sun, got paid several times over, made poor business deals and now their heirs keep coming back for more. National/DC has done more with and for Superman than the actual creators ever would have if left to their own devices. They were peddling versions of the strip for years on their own, to no avail...would they really have turned Superman into the cultural icon he is if they hadn't hooked up with National? The answer is "no"....
                Think OUTSIDE the Box! For the BEST in Repro & Custom Packaging!

                Comment

                • Earth 2 Chris
                  Verbose Member
                  • Mar 7, 2004
                  • 32525

                  #9
                  This is getting ridiculous.....someone please make the Siegels and Shusters just go away....IMO they had their day in the sun, got paid several times over, made poor business deals and now their heirs keep coming back for more. National/DC has done more with and for Superman than the actual creators ever would have if left to their own devices. They were peddling versions of the strip for years on their own, to no avail...would they really have turned Superman into the cultural icon he is if they hadn't hooked up with National? The answer is "no"....
                  I kind of think that too BUT there was some legal precedent for this.I've read so much of this crap here lately my brain's numb, but basically there is a precedent for creators to reapply for copyright material after a certain period, and that's what essentially is happening here.

                  Chris
                  sigpic

                  Comment

                  • The Toyroom
                    The Packaging King
                    • Dec 31, 2004
                    • 16653

                    #10
                    Yeah but just because it's "legal" it doesn't mean I'm crazy about it
                    Think OUTSIDE the Box! For the BEST in Repro & Custom Packaging!

                    Comment

                    • Earth 2 Chris
                      Verbose Member
                      • Mar 7, 2004
                      • 32525

                      #11
                      Yeah but just because it's "legal" it doesn't mean I'm crazy about it
                      Yeah, I'm with you. It seems it undervaules the ownership of the purchaser to me. If you create something you want to own for yourself...don't sell it. It is, in a sense, rewarding folks who made bad business decisions. It's not like someone put a gun to Siegel and Shuster's head. History shows they just KNEW Superman would take off like he did. Shuster even drew rough sketches of Superman hocking all sorts of products, clearly indicating he was going to become a huge marketing machine in his creators eyes. So why not ink a better deal, or wait for one?

                      Chris
                      sigpic

                      Comment

                      • kingdom warrior
                        OH JES!!
                        • Jul 21, 2005
                        • 12478

                        #12
                        Originally posted by Earth 2 Chris
                        Yeah, I'm with you. It seems it undervaules the ownership of the purchaser to me. If you create something you want to own for yourself...don't sell it. It is, in a sense, rewarding folks who made bad business decisions. It's not like someone put a gun to Siegel and Shuster's head. History shows they just KNEW Superman would take off like he did. Shuster even drew rough sketches of Superman hocking all sorts of products, clearly indicating he was going to become a huge marketing machine in his creators eyes. So why not ink a better deal, or wait for one?

                        Chris
                        Ok Correct me if I'm wrong......but in those days didn't National rule with an Iron hand where deals were basically take it or leave it? So did they really have a choice? and the Fact that they were Jewish and racially discriminated. Jews were looked down upon during the time....and were they not fired soon after turning over the rights to Superman?

                        So maybe that was the Best Deal that National was ever going to give them at the time........

                        Comment

                        • kryptosmaster
                          Removed.
                          • Jun 14, 2008
                          • 0

                          #13
                          The thing that kills me every time I read a story like this is that if Superman had been a flop or just another of the hundreds of Golden Age heroes that came and went and are long-forgotten; these grubbers wouldn't give a flying fig about getting the rights to "Grampa's beloved creation". They'd be telling stories at the family gatherings about how Grampa got "all that money" from DC Comics way back in the 30's for drawing "funny books". It's all about the Benjamins!

                          Rich

                          Comment

                          • Bizarro Amy
                            Formerly known as Del
                            • Dec 12, 2004
                            • 3336

                            #14
                            So are they saying that they could create Superman comic books at another company, as long as they don't use the elements that are still owned by DC? Would that mean that DC Comics can no longer publish Superman comics or have him as a member of the JLA if the heirs decided not to allow it, or to sell him to Marvel for instance?
                            Hey! Where's the waiter with the water for my daughter?

                            Check out my customs!
                            https://www.facebook.com/BizarroAmy
                            http://www.tumblr.com/blog/bizarroamy

                            Comment

                            • The Toyroom
                              The Packaging King
                              • Dec 31, 2004
                              • 16653

                              #15
                              Originally posted by kingdom warrior
                              and were they not fired soon after turning over the rights to Superman?

                              So maybe that was the Best Deal that National was ever going to give them at the time........
                              They sold Superman to National in 1938 and had a 10-year contract to produce Superman, so they definitely weren't fired "soon after".

                              In 1946, they sued National for the rights to Superman. They lost. Siegel returned to National in 1959 and wrote Superman stories, but wasn't credited (credits weren't common place back then). He sued National AGAIN in 1967 at which time he was let go.

                              In 1975, they yet AGAIN sued National/DC. Warner Communications gave them $20,000 a year for life and the credits "Superman created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster" were restored to everything associated with Supes (Comics, TV, Movies).

                              Siegel's wife and daughter filed a copyright termination notice against DC/Time-Warner in 1999. There were discussions between both parties but by 2004 the Siegel Estate broke off negoiations and sued Time-Warner for copyright infringement. T-W counter-sued. And that's sort of where we are now.

                              I see it as sour-grapes by guys that were a one-horse pony trick....they couldn't capture lightning in a bottle twice. In fact, I think the lightning persay had more to do with the National/DC/Time-Warner marketing arm over the years than anything Siegel and Shuster could have done on their own or would have done on their own.

                              Besides Superman, Siegel's only other claims to fame are the Spectre for DC and Funnyman for Magazine Enterprises. Now granted, yes, Superman is SUPERMAN but the Spectre and Funnyman haven't been necessarily burning up the comics racks in sales these last 70 years or so. Joe Shuster did practically nothing noteworthy after Superman. Obviously these guys weren't as prolific as a Stan Lee or a Jack Kirby or any of the other big guns in the comic industry.

                              Which one again makes me believe the success of Superman has always been more DC than S&S. They had their chance to make the character work, couldn't, and ultimately sold it to someone who COULD and DID make it work.

                              So the purchaser should be held accountable for making the character a success when the creators couldn't? If it wasn't for DC over the years and their handling of the character, there would be no interest or money for the Siegel and Shuster Estates to even sue over.

                              What sucks is by these new addendums to the copyright law, they get the seminal Action Comic #1 back-story, upon which DC built a legend. The original story itself is pretty worthless...it's what DC DID with it that has made it great...not what S&S originally put down on paper.

                              My 2-cents as ususal on this heated subject....
                              Think OUTSIDE the Box! For the BEST in Repro & Custom Packaging!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              😀
                              🥰
                              🤢
                              😎
                              😡
                              👍
                              👎