Memorial for Toronto boy can't feature Superman logo: DC Entertainment

[~.:/|T-MaN|\:.~]

Long time reader of the Hype, Don't post too often but I was curious to see what members here think of this story:

----------

"TORONTO -- DC Entertainment is refusing to allow the Superman logo to adorn a memorial statue of a Toronto boy who loved the superhero during his short life before his grandparents starved him to death."

...

"A coroner's inquest last winter into the death of five-year-old Jeffrey Baldwin caught the attention of an Ottawa man, who was moved by Jeffrey's plight and wanted to pay tribute to the boy"

...

"Boyce wanted to see Jeffrey depicted in a Superman costume, harkening back to inquest testimony from Jeffrey's father"

------

Full article here: http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/memori...ture-superman-logo-dc-entertainment-1.1902366


Personally, I was initially against DC's position but the more I think about it, the more I understand their concerns over having one of their trademarks being associated in any way to child abuse.

Lot's of fellow canucks on social media are saying DC is heartless and calling for boycotts

Thoughts?

 

[Ultron-5]

What? Come on DC do something nice and let the statue have the logo on it.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

This seems odd, considering the Bat-Kid thing in San Fran not that long ago.

 

[jonathancrane]

The family should have made the statue as originally designed and dealt with the fallout from WB. If there is one thing I have learned, it is easier to earn forgiveness than it is to acquire permission. Even in the event that DC still decided to pursue action, the family would have the upper hand: once the story hit the network news - the family being bullied to alter the monument for their deceased child - WB would have a crapstorm of epic proportions. But, as it is, the situation exists in the grey.

 

[charl_huntress]

I understand the legal reasons why this was done. Superman's logo is property, but I wish DC would have done something to ease the sting like donate money on the boy's behalf.

This

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

Did you just "This" your own post?!

Anyway, DC handled this the wrong way. They should take some kind of action. To take none now would send the wrong message.

 

[MrMaooz]

This

You just this'd your own post. That's worse than giving yourself a high-five in public.

 

[jonathancrane]

You just this'd your own post. That's worse than giving yourself a high-five in public.

 

[charl_huntress]

You just this'd your own post. That's worse than giving yourself a high-five in public.

I didn't want to repeat it, but I'll pat myself on the back anytime I want folks.

 

[Pink Ranger]

This whole sorry saga was big news up here for a while. To be honest, building a statue for this boy is, by Canadian standards, a hollow and superficial gesture meant to make certain people feel good in a very shallow way, but trivializes what happened.

 

[Apollo]

I am going to use is as much as I want!

 

[KevanG]

I can sorta get it that it would cause precedent for people to do these type of tombstones with or without permission and if they did then DC would look like major ***** for telling them they have to remove a tombstone.

 

[bullets]

It seems like they found a good resolution ( changing the s to a j). I'm just surprised they said no. I thought you could put anything you want on a gravestone.

 

[Pink Ranger]

It seems like they found a good resolution ( changing the s to a j). I'm just surprised they said no. I thought you could put anything you want on a gravestone.

It's not a gravestone. It's a public art piece, commissioned by someone with absolutely no connection to that little boy or his family whatsoever. It's like if I wanted to build a statue of Natalee Holloway in Times Square and asked DC for permission to dress her up like Catwoman.

 

[Monsieur Xavier]

I side with DC on this one.

Some quotes from the article :

"Basically they didn't want to have the character of Superman associated with child abuse. They weren't comfortable with that."


Boyce said he was angry and emotional when he first learned of their refusal, but after subsequent conversations with people at the company and their lawyers, he softened his stance.


"(I) realized that the most important thing is to have a fitting monument for Jeffrey, that it's about him," Boyce said. "To be fair to DC I don't think they wanted to say no. I think they gave it serious thought."

​

​

 

[The Squirrel]

edit.

 

[Pink Ranger]

Boyce said he was angry and emotional when he first learned of their refusal, but after subsequent conversations with people at the company and their lawyers, he softened his stance.

Perhaps he should save his anger for the grandparents, the boy's actual parents, the Catholic Children's Aid Society and a list of what I'm sure are numerous individuals and institutions that killed this kid. Warner/DC is pretty far down the line and small potatoes.

"(I) realized that the most important thing is to have a fitting monument for Jeffrey, that it's about him," Boyce said.

Wow, wow, sarcastic slow golf clap. Nice to know he eventually realized this was about the boy, AND NOT HIM! Which makes me wonder what his initial thinking was in his petty little narcissistic mind.

 

[bullets]

It's not a gravestone. It's a public art piece, commissioned by someone with absolutely no connection to that little boy or his family whatsoever. It's like if I wanted to build a statue of Natalee Holloway in Times Square and asked DC for permission to dress her up like Catwoman.

Damn I completely misread that article. Not that it's a bad thing to honor somebody , but it makes more sense why DC is against it.

 

[terry78]

Read, folks. Read.

 

[Pink Ranger]

Damn I completely misread that article. Not that it's a bad thing to honor somebody , but it makes more sense why DC is against it.

Don't sweat it. At least you're giving it second thought: looking at the online reaction from Canadians, most of them are just reacting against DC and haven't even read the circumstances of the case, and what a hollow, superficial and self-serving exercise this whole statue situation is.

 

[HeyZeus]

DC changed their mind and will allow the S on the statue.

 

[Hal_Jordan]

DC changed their mind and will allow the S on the statue.

Yup

http://robot6.comicbookresources.co...jeffrey-baldwin-statue-to-bear-superman-logo/

I guess they finally realized what a Public Relations nightmare this was going to be.

 

[Hal_Jordan]

You just this'd your own post. That's worse than giving yourself a high-five in public.

I guess that's what you have to do when no one else will.

 

[Lencho01]

I would've stuck with the decision of not allowing it.

 

[BestGirl]

Or at least kept it a J in the shield instead of an S. That would actually have been more touching.