Siegel & Shuster vs WB: Superman and Infinite Crisis - Part 1

[Stephen K. Hone]

What court would that be? And what would stop the heirs/Toberoff from finding another court to stop that court?

I think the federal court that handles copyright laws is pretty darn high up there....and if they tell you you have to do something, you pretty much have to or risk something much more severe.


Again, I think we're talking about something much bigger than small parts like wipers and a patent issue.

It was potentially tens of millions. Hardly insignificant. You find the right judge or court, and they'll pre-empt that previous ruling. It happens all the time. Then there will be another ruling, and another appeal. I suppose this could end up before the Supreme court if they choose to hear it.

 

[solidsnake86]

WB doesn't want to make a new version of Superman as much they may just have to, or just stop altogether. The reason why they're fighting is to depower the other side as much as possible in case they do want to settle....force them to accept a low-ball basement offer with no alternatives. Look at it as a nasty custody battle in a divorce.

I don't know but since the court allowed those documents from toberoffs office into evidence I'd say thats a big step to some sort of settlement.

 

[solidsnake86]

It was potentially tens of millions. Hardly insignificant. You find the right judge or court, and they'll pre-empt that previous ruling. It happens all the time. Then there will be another ruling, and another appeal. I suppose this could end up before the Supreme court if they choose to hear it.

There would have to be a federal issue to end up at the supreme court. The judge also has to look at what happens if they allow the rights to revert back. And that decision is a massive public policy one. I know its not the most popular view siding with WB but the superman character employes a lot of people. Take that away and potentially hundreds of people are out of a job. That will factor into the decision. If WB gets toberoff to recuse himself there will be a settlement and since WB went and hired outside council now, its not going to be that easy for toberoff.

 

[KalMart]

It was potentially tens of millions. Hardly insignificant.

I don't think it was more than what it would cost Ford to replace the wipers. Also, the patent issue wasn't based on the profitability of any particular line of Ford cars. This is different.

You find the right judge or court, and they'll pre-empt that previous ruling. It happens all the time.

Again, which judge/court would preempt a federal copyright court ruling?

Then there will be another ruling, and another appeal. I suppose this could end up before the Supreme court if they choose to hear it.

See...with every other hypothetical 'court' that WB would find to keep using Superman, there'd be another lawsuit, and another counter-suit, and another set of appeals by yet another court. How long do you think WB want to keep doing that? If WB could get away with something like that, it'd likely be done already and they wouldn't be at this point.

The ONLY thing that'll allow WB to legally continue using Superman as he's been would be a monetary settlement between them, and the heirs/Toberoff. There's no way around that now. WB has as much chance of finding a legal 'loophole' as you or I would if we wanted to use Mickey Mouse's image to make money without permission from Disney.

 

[KalMart]

I don't know but since the court allowed those documents from toberoffs office into evidence I'd say thats a big step to some sort of settlement.

As long as the heirs agree to it with their (possibly) new lawyer....if they can even afford one. If it's just up to the heirs, WB could also wait and starve them out until they have no choice but to take a tiny sum. And then things'll be right back to where they were with the original Siegel and Schuster.

But hey, at least fans'll get their precious Superman back.

 

[solidsnake86]

^well I doubt the heirs have that much money and thats why those documents are so important. If they show that Toberoff has a 50% stake in the property that is not going to look good at all. Sometimes you have to have clean hands when you go into court so the judge may not look favouribly on that deal. I'm sure WB has wanted to settle, but Toberoff is going for gold, he obviously doesn't want to. I don't think any new lawyers who takes on the heirs as the clients is going to be like that.

 

[KalMart]

^well I doubt the heirs have that much money and thats why those documents are so important. If they show that Toberoff has a 50% stake in the property that is not going to look good at all. Sometimes you have to have clean hands when you go into court so the judge may not look favouribly on that deal. I'm sure WB has wanted to settle, but Toberoff is going for gold, he obviously doesn't want to. I don't think any new lawyers who takes on the heirs as the clients is going to be like that.

Maybe they'll work for free.....or at least agree to a deferred nominal payment not commensurate to a huge settlement in favor of their clients. And maybe they'll even cure cancer, world hunger, and end all wars while they're at it.

Everyone wants to settle...but they each want to settle on their own terms.

 

[Stephen K. Hone]

There would have to be a federal issue to end up at the supreme court. The judge also has to look at what happens if they allow the rights to revert back. And that decision is a massive public policy one. I know its not the most popular view siding with WB but the superman character employes a lot of people. Take that away and potentially hundreds of people are out of a job. That will factor into the decision. If WB gets toberoff to recuse himself there will be a settlement and since WB went and hired outside council now, its not going to be that easy for toberoff.

Exactly, and WB's lawyers will mine the economic hardship angle for all it's worth. If the heirs truly are owed money I would hope Wb will cough it up. However if it is just a greedy opportunistic lawyer driving this, I hope they lose. I'd hate it to go to a jury trial, due to the fact it is so easy to paint big corporations as evil and greedy and the Jury will likely side with the little guy imo whether it is warranted or not.

 

[KalMart]

Exactly, and WB's lawyers will mine the economic hardship angle for all it's worth. If the heirs truly are owed money I would hope Wb will cough it up. However if it is just a greedy opportunistic lawyer driving this, I hope they lose. I'd hate it to go to a jury trial, due to the fact it is so easy to paint big corporations as evil and greedy and the Jury will likely side with the little guy imo whether it is warranted or not.

As I understand it...the heirs DO have legal ownership of part of the rights...that part's already done with the recent new copyright laws. They will be owed money if WB wants to continue producing material with Superman as we've known him. It's not like WB is still fighting to keep that from happening. After next year, that 'transfer' will be complete, so the heirs and WB will be forced to negotiate over a settlement amount. It's that amount that could cause big delays if there's a major disagreement....and that's the monkey-wrench that Toberoff's deal with the heirs has created.

Not to say that WB had a nice, generous and lucrative deal already prepared for the heirs...but with Toberoff's financial interests, he'll be asking for the moon as well if there's going to be any continuation of Superman with the whole package as we know it. So either Superman goes into limbo while the two sides fight over how much is owed...or WB/DC decides to move forward with a version that only incorporates the parts that they still own, and they owe the heirs nothing...which is what it looks like they're preparing for with the new suit and reboot, etc.

 

[merced]

Not to say that WB had a nice, generous and lucrative deal already prepared for the heirs...but with Toberoff's financial interests, he'll be asking for the moon as well if there's going to be any continuation of Superman with the whole package as we know it. So either Superman goes into limbo while the two sides fight over how much is owed...or WB/DC decides to move forward with a version that only incorporates the parts that they still own, and they owe the heirs nothing...which is what it looks like they're preparing for with the new suit and reboot, etc.

Reading Trexler the strategy seems to be:

1) WB/DC move forward with a new character incorporating the righs they still own - all the villains for instance. That means the reboot in the fall is a frst step. By 2013 the Man of Steel titles will have to drop Lois, Clark, the Kents, invulnerability, any reference to Superman and other things.

2) Tie the heirs and Toberoff up in cort indefinitely. 5 - 10 years. Up to the point if possible where the rights go public and are worthless to the heirs. In the meantime WB/DC has a new character and they don't need to worry about the rights going public.

3) Get the initial 2008 decision favoring the heirs overturned on appeal.

WB/DC have the lagel terams to carry this out. The heirs are going to end up with virtually nothing IMO.

 

[merced]

Sorry, double posted.

 

[merced]

They'll extend those public domain laws. Thats given. Money is all it takes. Sticking with a valuable property is whole lot easier than trying to make a new one. Thats simple. I mean hell they might as well start a new Batman since he's their most valuable asset. Wait I dont see them doing that so your point is invalid.

No way. The public domain laws affect much more than Superman.

If they were not in place Shakspeare could not be used in college plays or general thestre w/o paying a fee to the family or corproation that still held the rights.

Superman will go public in the not too distant future which is one reason WB is creating a new character to replace Superman. They will own that character completely for 75 years and in the interim will kp all the profits they make from exploiting the character.

 

[TheIncredibleSk]

Why aren't they creating a new Batman then? I mean he is their biggest character am I right? So why aren't doing the same for Batman since he goes public a year afterwards. They'll changed the laws for properties. Just watch.

 

[Dr.]

By 2013 the Man of Steel titles will have to drop Lois, Clark, the Kents, invulnerability, any reference to Superman and other things.

How did S&S get custody of invulnerability? Granted, their Superman was tough - "...nothing less than a bursting shell could penetrate his skin." Still, a bursting shell could ruin his day. That doesn't compare to Supes' invulnerability level as it evolved post Action #1.

 

[chamber-music]

How much do folks thing Toberoff and the Siegel & Shuster families want from WB on future earnings from Superman?

10%, 25%, 50% even?

 

[Stephen K. Hone]

How did S&S get custody of invulnerability? Granted, their Superman was tough - "...nothing less than a bursting shell could penetrate his skin." Still, a bursting shell could ruin his day. That doesn't compare to Supes' invulnerability level as it evolved post Action #1.

I think a lot of the, "WB's gets to keep this, and the S & S heirs get these elements" is starting to get like Chinese whispers where it slowly changes in each subsequent retelling. I think a lot of it is likely BS or pure conjecture, until the courts actually assign different things to the different parties. I could see a judge saying S & S heirs are to be payed X amount,and possibly an ongoing royalty, but they and Toberoff have no control over anything.

 

[merced]

Also, I can't believe WB are treating this film as a one off, end of the line proposition. I'd like to know if they have optioned Henry & Amy for more than one film.

Good question. When Routh and Ryan Reynolds and the Ironman sar were signed w/in a short while it was said they'd been optioned for several films. 2 is usually the case.

With Cavill we haven't heard a thing and he was signed 6 months ago.

Don't know if it means anything or not.

I wouldn't be surprised however if Cavill refused to sign an option for more films. Knowing the legal situation and the odds being against a sequel.

Given the situation I could see WB going along with this.

Anyway, no one seems to know.

 

[merced]

Why aren't they creating a new Batman then? I mean he is their biggest character am I right? So why aren't doing the same for Batman since he goes public a year afterwards. They'll changed the laws for properties. Just watch.

I suppose as DC/WB gett a few years out they will.

But for now the difference is that WB/DC own Batman pretty much in toto. No 50% licsensing fees and such.

Plus Batman is far, far more lucrative than Superman.

 

[Stephen K. Hone]

How did S&S get custody of invulnerability? Granted, their Superman was tough - "...nothing less than a bursting shell could penetrate his skin." Still, a bursting shell could ruin his day. That doesn't compare to Supes' invulnerability level as it evolved post Action #1.

It would appear that WB/DC gets way more than S & S heirs, based on when each particular element of Superman was developed. The classic \S/ Shield (WB) Full Invunerability (WB) Flying (WB) Kryptonite (WB) Cape with an \S/ (WB) Man Of Steel (WB) Lex Luthor (WB?)and a boatload of other stuff. The heirs get a few key elements, but what can they do with them? Does anybody have a full list of things developed prior to DC or their antecedents?

 

[KalMart]

I think a lot of the, "WB's gets to keep this, and the S & S heirs get these elements" is starting to get like Chinese whispers where it slowly changes in each susequent retelling. I think a lot of it is likely BS or pure conjecture, until the courts actually assign different things to the different parties. I could see a judge saying S & S heirs are to be payed X amount,and possibly an ongoing royalty, but they and Toberoff have no control over anything.

Story/design/character elements developed prior to vs. after the sale to National. The 'control' they have is that they can refuse a settlement offer that isn't to their liking and sue anyone who uses those elements.

 

[Stephen K. Hone]

I suppose as DC/WB gett a few years out they will.

But for now the difference is that WB/DC own Batman pretty much in toto. No 50% licsensing fees and such.

Plus Batman is far, far more lucrative than Superman.

No way will Batman, Mickey Mouse, and similar properties fall into the realm of the public domain. Wouldn't that be like saying, Coca Cola is now be a generic term for that kind of soda, and that everyone can make it, and Coca Cola now have to hand over their secret formula??!

 

[Dr.]

Does anybody have a full list of things developed prior to DC or their antecedents?

Someone (forgot who or where) posted a list of copyrighted details from Action #1. It included names (Superman, Clark), a few other details and... "bullets bouncing off his chest." Fair enough, that power is specified in Action #1. But it seems to me that DC "invented" the much broader concept of Supes' "invulnerability." It would be odd if he could survive a nuclear blast but was fearful of gunfire. And can you really copyright "bullets bouncing off his chest"? Don't other superheroes (the Hulk?) have this ability too?

 

[Stephen K. Hone]

Someone (forgot who or where) posted a list of copyrighted details from Action #1. It included names (Superman, Clark), a few other details and... "bullets bouncing off his chest." Fair enough, that power is specified in Action #1. But it seems to me that DC "invented" the much broader concept of Supes' "invulnerability." It would be odd if he could survive a nuclear blast but was fearful of gunfire. And can you really copyright "bullets bouncing off his chest"? Don't other superheroes (the Hulk?) have this ability too?

And many heroes of that era had trunks, so it's not like S & S invented them. For Batman, Bob Kane Borrowed or was inspired by the cape and other elements from Zorro iirc. I don't see Zorro's heirs suing WB/DC.

 

[Stephen K. Hone]

Someone (forgot who or where) posted a list of copyrighted details from Action #1. It included names (Superman, Clark), a few other details and... "bullets bouncing off his chest." Fair enough, that power is specified in Action #1. But it seems to me that DC "invented" the much broader concept of Supes' "invulnerability." It would be odd if he could survive a nuclear blast but was fearful of gunfire. And can you really copyright "bullets bouncing off his chest"? Don't other superheroes (the Hulk?) have this ability too?

So what do they get? Krypton, Lois, Daily Planet, Clark Kent, possibly the Superman name? Doesn't amount to much, even though those are important things. If Toberoff and the heirs are intent on inflicting damage on WB by withholding those elements they can certainly do it but imo they have way more to lose than WB/DC. WB will just call him The Man Of Steel, (everyone will refer to him as Superman by default anyhow) and the \S/ even if it is a crest from his home planet can also stand for Steel.

 

[Superfreak]

No way will Batman, Mickey Mouse, and similar properties fall into the realm of the public domain. Wouldn't that be like saying, Coca Cola is now be a generic term for that kind of soda, and that everyone can make it, and Coca Cola now have to hand over their secret formula??!

I believe the way it works is that if you are using the product productively, one can petition to extend.