Page 1 of 1

#1 Superman Returns to Creator's Estates

Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:05 pm
by Hotfoot
Article
Superman co-creator's family given rights
Siegels now control character's Krypton origins
By MARC GRASER

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.
And here we have the most likely reason for the reboot, DC lost Superman. Not entirely, and not all at once, but the Simon and Shuster estates, barring some additional legal wrangling by WB and/or DC, basically are getting back control of Superman. Now, smart money is to take whatever offer DC winds up giving them, because it's likely to be massive, especially if they make them twist for a few years first.

#2

Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 7:07 pm
by frigidmagi
To be honest I'm not sure what else the estate can do, sell it to Disney/Marvel? Make their own damn comic? Turn him into a public domain character (I wonder if the character would survive that honestly?)?

Don't get me wrong, I'm on the estate's side here, Siegel and Shuster got fucked hardcore (so did most creators back then, but most creators didn't make an icon that has come to define a genre and made millions and millions of dollars) but it's like the dog chasing the bus, what do you do when you got the damn thing?

#3

Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 8:21 pm
by Batman
So just to get my bearings-the Siegel family now owns the rights on Kal- El...before he even starts to become the Man of Steel.
So what exactly does that mean, legally?

#4

Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:04 pm
by frigidmagi
Smallville owes them money?

#5

Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:48 pm
by Hotfoot
Legally, no idea, but logistically?

DC no longer owns the name Superman, Clark Kent, Lois Lane, and possibly Perry White. They get to keep the things they invented after the fact, like flight, Kryptonite, and Jimmy Olsen.

But who's going to buy "Superdude" #1, starring Jimmy Olsen and crack reporter Doris Drive?

Realistically, this is all about money. Royalties, legal fees, the whole nine. DC is pretty badly fucked if they lose Superman, and the estates can use that to their advantage