Siegel & Shuster vs WB: Superman and Infinite Crisis

[Super Kal]

If the ruling survives a Time Warner legal challenge, it may also open the door to a similar reversion of rights to the estate of Mr. Shuster in 2013. That would give heirs of the two creators control over use of their lucrative character until at least 2033 — and perhaps longer, if Congress once again extends copyright terms — according to Marc Toberoff, a lawyer who represents the Siegels and the Shuster estate.

“It would be very powerful,” said Mr. Toberoff, speaking by telephone on Friday. “After 2013, Time Warner couldn’t exploit any new Superman-derived works without a license from the Siegels and Shusters.”




According to the above, it sounds like after 2013 they may be able to do that. Maybe we (or at least I) will finally get the kickass Superman movie we've been waiting for.

about damn time

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Does this mean that proceeds from SR IS INCLUDED in the lawsuit thereby reducing WB monetary share of the property?

I believe so.

 

[Buttman]

If the ruling survives a Time Warner legal challenge, it may also open the door to a similar reversion of rights to the estate of Mr. Shuster in 2013. That would give heirs of the two creators control over use of their lucrative character until at least 2033 — and perhaps longer, if Congress once again extends copyright terms — according to Marc Toberoff, a lawyer who represents the Siegels and the Shuster estate.

“It would be very powerful,” said Mr. Toberoff, speaking by telephone on Friday. “After 2013, Time Warner couldn’t exploit any new Superman-derived works without a license from the Siegels and Shusters.”




According to the above, it sounds like after 2013 they may be able to do that. Maybe we (or at least I) will finally get the kickass Superman movie we've been waiting for.

What do the heirs seriously know about Superman other than them not having to lift a finger because of a character created by their father or grandfather years before they were born? If the original creators were still living and got a cut, glorious. But they didn't. I say this is bad.

 

[Bulletproof]

I believe so.

So in just simple compensation terms (not accounting for interest due) SR could then be viewed as an even bigger box office disappointment thereby reducing the probability of a Singer Continuation especially if Valkarie does poorly.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

So in just simple compensation terms (not accounting for interest due) SR could then be viewed as an even bigger box office disappointment thereby reducing the probability of a Singer Continuation especially if Valkarie does poorly.

But then WB would have to buy him out of his contract (if they fire him, they have to pay him). Are they willing to pay even more money in that regard? It will be interesting to see how this all develops.

 

[Bulletproof]

But then WB would have to buy him out of his contract (if they fire him, they have to pay him). Are they willing to pay even more money in that regard? It will be interesting to see how this all develops.

Agreed. If anything it is a blow to Superman fans whether those fans liked SR or not. This ruling can potentially put all Superman movie properties on the back-burner for several years.

 

[bgshw44]

So in just simple compensation terms (not accounting for interest due) SR could then be viewed as an even bigger box office disappointment thereby reducing the probability of a Singer Continuation especially if Valkarie does poorly.

MOS will be well into development by the time Valkyrie hits theaters imo

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Agreed. If anything it is a blow to Superman fans whether those fans liked SR or not. This ruling can potentially put all Superman movie properties on the back-burner for several years.

With the way WB has handled Superman on film, I don't see how it can get any worse. Look how many years it took us to get another Superman live action film, and then after all that we got Superman Returns. A film stuck in the Donnerverse that was basically a retread of S:TM with a kid thrown in.

Maybe it's time someone else did get their hands on this property. After 2013, that may entirely be possible.

 

[Super Kal]

maybe that's what it needs to be better... an even longer rest...

 

[Bulletproof]

Yeah, That might be the right treatment.

 

[Compi716]

I just hope the Heirs keep things the way they should be, and don't do anything crazy like sell Superman to Marvel or something.

 

[romeogbs19]

This is very awesome news.

 

[BETArayBill]

What do the heirs seriously know about Superman other than them not having to lift a finger because of a character created by their father or grandfather years before they were born? If the original creators were still living and got a cut, glorious. But they didn't. I say this is bad.

i totally agree with you on the point these people had nothing to do with the creation of superman and should not have a say in the characters future.

 

[batman44]

I just hope the Heirs keep things the way they should be, and don't do anything crazy like sell Superman to Marvel or something.

I would cry if that happend.

 

[hippie_hunter]

What do the heirs seriously know about Superman other than them not having to lift a finger because of a character created by their father or grandfather years before they were born? If the original creators were still living and got a cut, glorious. But they didn't. I say this is bad.

Actually DC screwed over Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster quite a bit. Not to the extent of Bill Finger, but they still got screwed.

As I said eariler though, the familes come off as a bunch of *****ers though. If Superman wasn't the cash cow that it is for Time Warner, I'd doubt they'd even care about what Siegel and Schuster did.

 

[KaptainKrypton]

^Word. The families have had a no-strings-attached pension that they forewent in the late nineties because they wanted more money. By the letter of the original agreements set forth, Warner didn't have to give them jack-squat, or restore their credits of creation in the books. The families involved just wanted more money. Not that I think Warner is squeaky clean by any means, because they are owned by oil. However, I'm a fan of the character and this throws one hell of a monkey wrench into the deal. Just look at what happened when they reclaimed Superboy. DC wiped him out and ixnayed any future releases of the Superboy TV series as easy as a bad housecleaner brushes dust under a rug. Coincidence that the LSOH series was also recently terminated faster than all the fake Sarah Connors back in '84? Well, the other funny tidbit is that most of the characters in the Superman universe are still owned by DC. Nevertheless, I'm mortified to see what happens now.

 

[hippie_hunter]

^Word. The families have had a no-strings-attached pension that they forewent in the late nineties because they wanted more money. By the letter of the original agreements set forth, Warner didn't have to give them jack-squat, or restore their credits of creation in the books. The families involved just wanted more money. Not that I think Warner is squeaky clean by any means, because they are owned by oil. However, I'm a fan of the character and this throws one hell of a monkey wrench into the deal. Just look at what happened when they reclaimed Superboy. DC wiped him out and ixnayed any future releases of the Superboy TV series as easy as a bad housecleaner brushes dust under a rug. Coincidence that the LSOH series was also recently terminated faster than all the fake Sarah Connors back in '84? Well, the other funny tidbit is that most of the characters in the Superman universe are still owned by DC. Nevertheless, I'm mortified to see what happens now.

Time Warner will probably end up paying them the necessary licenses so that they can continue to have exclusive use of the character. Time Warner isn't just going to let the Superman character go, he's one of their most important assets. The Siegel's know that and if they have financial common sense, that's what they're going for.

I really doubt that they actually have any genuine interest in the character and what happens to it so I don't see them taking the character anywhere else.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Exactly, hippie_hunter!

My $$$s still on Time Warner (with their vast wealth of time, money and lawyers) getting the decision over-turned. Regardless, they'll pay the families enough $$$ to shut up just like they did back in '78 right before the release of Superman The Movie.

This will not delay the Superman Returns sequel for 2010 or Justice League Mortal for 2009.

 

[Captain Villa]

Talk about coming out of the woodwork...

Always here, just nothing of note worth commenting on.

 

[Snoo]

^Word. The families have had a no-strings-attached pension that they forewent in the late nineties because they wanted more money. By the letter of the original agreements set forth, Warner didn't have to give them jack-squat, or restore their credits of creation in the books. The families involved just wanted more money. Not that I think Warner is squeaky clean by any means, because they are owned by oil. However, I'm a fan of the character and this throws one hell of a monkey wrench into the deal.

Well, I'd say most people would want more money, considering how profitable Superman can be. We're looking at this from a fan's point of view, of course it would "bug" many of us the family's just doing this for the money and not out of love for Superman... But just think about it. Wouldn't you want more money in life, some pension or no?

I think when a lot of money's involved, lots of people would be very tempted and go for that instead of the pension. Clearly the risk is worth it to them.

 

[Showtime]

Always here, just nothing of note worth commenting on.

So true.

 

[Timstuff]

Depending on how this goes, in 2013 we might be looking at "Googleplex Crisis" sweeping through DC comics. Superman will become "Powerman," Clark Kent will become "Mark McCoy," Lois Lane will become "Josey Jane," and Metropolis will become "Megapolis." It will be a say day for the comic world, indeed.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Annoying... If the Siegel and Shuster sold the character to DC in the first place.. then that should be it. Deal done.

It was their mistake, not DC's!!!

This better not turn into a Batman/Fox/Warner crap, only on a larger scale.

It better not mess the characters success in any way for DC or WB!

 

[hippie_hunter]

This will not delay the Superman Returns sequel for 2010 or Justice League Mortal for 2009.

I'd imagine other reasons if those films ended up getting shelved.

 

[boog_spin]

man i hate the way the legal system works in this country sometimes....

they SELL the rights....then the family just looking for an easy buck sues for back payment...on a property they SOLD?

i'd be pretty pissed if i got sued by the guy who sold me my house because the property value went up....get what i am saying?

besides...i really doubt the "family" will know what to do with superman any better than the people currently in charge...its not they created the character or have any bearing on the current state or incarnation or past incarnations of superman....i think they just want a quick buck..get the rights...do NOTHING..then collect for the work of their great-great grandfathers...