Siegel & Shuster vs WB: Superman and Infinite Crisis

[FlawlessVictory]

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!

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?

Agreed.

 

[buggs0268]

Actually copyright laws were very iffy to non existent before that ruling in the 60's or 70's. Mikey Mouse was about to go public before the gov extended the rights for another so many years around 2000. International copyrights were all over the place till the meeting in stockholm in 1977.

 

[Compi716]

I still feel very nervous about all of this.

I just hope the heirs have the honor and respect to understand that they are dealing with something far greater than themselves.
Don't mess it up.

 

[buggs0268]

This will probably be a good thing. Now the WB knows they actually have to make a movie on par with STM to make money, so they will really get it right if the familes decide to keep it at the WB. I have a feeling Singer may be out due to this.

 

[boog_spin]

This will probably be a good thing. Now the WB knows they actually have to make a movie on par with STM to make money, so they will really get it right if the familes decide to keep it at the WB. I have a feeling Singer may be out due to this.

i think they did think ($200 million isnt a cheap effort) they made a movie on par with the original superman...it just didnt work...eh but you may be (and probably are right) in them thinking just because they slapped the "superman" name on it they would have a goldmine.....

 

[buggs0268]

From Emi-Jaynes blog, posted archangel who knows about the lawsuit:

...the lawsuit was to determine if the Siegel family owned the rights to Superman. The reason they needed to prove this is because they have attempted to file a "termination of rights agreement" with DC/Time Warner. If there is an appeal, which you can bet there will be, and they win, the family members of Siegel and Shuster would end up with sole rights as of 2013 if they chose to continue with the termination.

As it stands, the Siegels would now be due a huge chunk of any future Superman proceeds if WB moved forward and receive compensation from anything distributed between 1999 and today. This also means that WB, already having not made anything on Superman Returns, owes a gross percentage to the Siegel family for that film too. Making it even more of a failure and possibly dooming JLA from happening. The best part is now they have a major say in who can or can't use the Superman name, logo, and mythos.

and

The Siegel family would be due 50% of any revenue earned by the name, symbol, and likeness of the character Superman from 1999 forward. This will end up costing Time Warner/WB/DC hundreds of millions. Not to mention that the suit also claimed they misrepresented a number of items on annual and quarterly reports which could open a federal investigation now that a judge has ruled in the Siegels favor.

And like I said, as of 2013, the FULL rights to Superman go back to the families of Siegel and Shuster. They want nothing to do with DC or WB anymore.

and

The Siegels getting their 50% share of Superman back does not mean WB can not move forward with a Superman film. It means should WB continue with Superman films, comics, toys, etc any revenue they receive must be shared equally with the Siegel family. It also means the Siegels have the legal right to lease the property to anyone they choose, including Marvel, provided they also equally share any revenue they receive with Time Warner.

As for 2013, I thought I explained this well enough. In 2013, Time Warner's 50% ownership of Superman that belonged to Shuster will revert to the Shuster family. At which point, WB/DC will no longer be able to produce ANYTHING with Superman in it. Both families feel the character has been abused and that they have been extremely under-compensated and mistreated. Thus they are taking Superman back completely that year.

and

As of 2013, no new Superman products will be produced unless a new deal is reached.

As for the two franchises I mentioned, yes, a second studio (hopefully mine) will be able to put Superman on the big screen. The Siegels can lease their rights to anyone they choose. Time Warner had 100% of the rights which is why WB was the only studio making Superman, Batman, etc. Like how now Marvel owns all their properties again, but before there were several studios making the various characters into films. Now, anyone can make a Superman movie if they get permission.

A better example might be how there are two films being made about Harvey Milk. There could legally be two Superman films. Understand now? Time Warner can't say anything provided they receive 50% of any compensation due to the Siegels from an agreement they make with another studio. It still comes down to getting paid.

and

That still has to be worked out. Because each character was created using elements of the original creation, the Siegels contend they have a partial right to everything. The judge so far agrees. However, should we reach an agreement, we may be forced to use the earliest incarnation of Superman or design a new one using what Siegel and Shuster created. It's not going to happen quickly. But at least the door is open to make a Superman film worthy of the character and not simply for cash.

and

It's Saturday and nothing on television is any good....lol

WB will most certainly appeal the financial ruling regarding the payouts for 1999 to current day. Who wouldn't?? But the Siegels could counter that appeal with an injunction barring the forward movement on Superman and possibly JLA pending the outcome of the appeal. There are a lot of aspects involved. One thing is certain though. The Siegels have 50% of the rights back and Superman is no longer under the stranglehold of WB.

 

[Nightwing1977]

Pathetic. They are just being greedy. The more money you get, the more you become greedy & want more. While I feel sorry that DC screw Siegel & Shuster in the past with the credits thing, but that was a long time ago & thing has change when they gave them the credit back at the time STM came out in theater. Even if Warner Bros. don't make anymore Superman movies, what make some of you so sure a different movie studio that will own the movies will handle it better? Almost many movie studios are alike, that even it will feel like WB still making them. FOX are no different than Warner Bros. Neither is Paramount, Disney, etc. Whatever happend in this situation, Superman will still be at WB. Period.

 

[buggs0268]

Some movies have had different studios make their sequels even though the studio that made the original still exists.

 

[pwl4life]

This is ridiculous. Superman is the face of DC, I can't imagine Superman leased to anyone else but DC. Given how marvel handles some of it's characters (Spiderman, Cap) I'd hate to see what they'd do to Superman if they get their hands on him.

Also I know that this suit was one of the reasons the Superboy DVD's were put on hold, I wonder what this means for future releases. Ilia Salkind said that WB plans on releasing the final 3 seasons with Gerard Christopher, I wonder if this has changed their plans.

A new Deal could be reached and WB/DC could keep the character passed 2013 but right now everything is up in the air and it worries me.

 

[Lestat74]

Ok, so reading various analysis of this ruling today, I think it's safe to say that DC Comics produced version of Superman is not going anywhere anytime soon. The Siegels got half ( and only half ) of the copyright to the story in Action Comics #1, since that was written and drawn before it was sold to DC in 1938. Everything else Superman related that they made was done as work for hire, meaning DC has full control of characters/concepts such as Krypton, Kryptonite, The Daily Planet, Perry White, Lex Luthor, Jimmy Olsen, The Fortress of Solitutude, Metropolis, Smallville, Lana Lang, Ma & Pa Kent, Jor-El, Lara, Kal-El ( the name ) Supergirl....not to mention Superman's powers of flight, heat vision, super breath, and ( maybe, I could be wrong here ) X-ray vision. Essentially, pretty much everything that makes Superman Superman, with the exception of the costume ( although NOT the recognizable S Shield; that version is trademarked to DC ) and the names Clark Kent and Lois Lane. So if the Siegel heirs want to make a comic book or movie or show based on those things, they can. But who is gonna publish it/ film it? Marvel wouldn't dare, nor do I think they'd want to. More than likely, they'll take a settlment from Time Warner/DC....or they'll be stubborn and try to get properties made out of their 1938 version of Superman, that no one will really want because it will be seen as the lamer, less powers version. If this goes in in appeals court for years though, it could hinder any future Superman movies, tv, cartoons, any media really. But if the wheels grind to a halt then NO ONE, not the heirs or Time Warner make any money, and believe me...they both want money. So I hope it's resolved before all that happens. But it's safe to say at least the comics will be safe.

Anyway, there's a pretty good run down of all this over at Newsarama today: http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=151819

 

[bgshw44]

Ok, so reading various analysis of this ruling today, I think it's safe to say that DC Comics produced version of Superman is not going anywhere anytime soon. The Siegels got half ( and only half ) of the copyright to the story in Action Comics #1, since that was written and drawn before it was sold to DC in 1938. Everything else Superman related that they made was done as work for hire, meaning DC has full control of characters/concepts such as Krypton, Kryptonite, The Daily Planet, Perry White, Lex Luthor, Jimmy Olsen, The Fortress of Solitutude, Metropolis, Smallville, Lana Lang, Ma & Pa Kent, Jor-El, Lara, Kal-El ( the name ) Supergirl....not to mention Superman's powers of flight, heat vision, super breath, and ( maybe, I could be wrong here ) X-ray vision. Essentially, pretty much everything that makes Superman Superman, with the exception of the costume ( although NOT the recognizable S Shield; that version is trademarked to DC ) and the names Clark Kent and Lois Lane. So if the Siegel heirs want to make a comic book or movie or show based on those things, they can. But who is gonna publish it/ film it? Marvel wouldn't dare, nor do I think they'd want to. More than likely, they'll take a settlment from Time Warner/DC....or they'll be stubborn and try to get properties made out of their 1938 version of Superman, that no one will really want because it will be seen as the lamer, less powers version. If this goes in in appeals court for years though, it could hinder any future Superman movies, tv, cartoons, any media really. But if the wheels grind to a halt then NO ONE, not the heirs or Time Warner make any money, and believe me...they both want money. So I hope it's resolved before all that happens. But it's safe to say at least the comics will be safe.

Anyway, there's a pretty good run down of all this over at Newsarama today: [URL="http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=151819"]http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=151819[/URL]

exactly this is a non issue they want a settlement

 

[nintendo nerd]

This will probably be a good thing. Now the WB knows they actually have to make a movie on par with STM to make money, so they will really get it right if the familes decide to keep it at the WB. I have a feeling Singer may be out due to this.

I knew you were going to say that.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

Can someone break this down in the simplest of terms?

From now until 2013, WB can make any Superman film and DC Comics any Superman comic but they just have to pay a share to the Siegels?

After 2013, when/if the Shusters get their share, can DC Comics still print Superman comics or does WB/DC completely lose Superman at this point? What happens to Superman on film at this point?

 

[Nixon]

I think this means that another zero has been added to the payout the Seigel's are looking for from DC/Time-Warner and I think this means that DC/Time-Warner are going to be a little more inclined to write that cheque even with all those zeroes.

I also think that whatever happens, be it a fat payout or losing the character, that this will be DC's penance for not treating Seigel and Shuster better.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

From now until 2013, WB can make any Superman film and DC Comics any Superman comic but they just have to pay a share to the Siegels?

Yes. Half of it. There is little to no financial incentive to make another Superman movie right now.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

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

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117983184.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

Warner vexed by legal Man of Steel
Lawyer Toberoff dings Superman

By DIANE GARRETT

He's a superhero to rights holders -- but Kryptonite to studios.

Last week, attorney Marc Toberoff won a potentially costly "Superman" victory against Warner Bros. for co-creator Jerome Siegel's heirs. The federal ruling, which gives the heirs a stake in rights sold 71 years ago, could put a serious crimp on future plans for one of the studio's most enduring -- and lucrative -- franchises, especially if co-creator Max Shuster's heirs follow suit in five years, when they are eligible to do so.

As it is, the studio has at least two Superman projects in development -- a follow-up to Bryan Singer's "Superman Returns" and "Justice League" -- and it may end up paying tens of millions from the domestic haul of "Superman Returns" to Siegel's heirs under the ruling, which applies to domestic monies for Superman projects since 1999.

The case is Toberoff's latest -- and potentially most damaging -- claim against the studio. The dedicated copyright crusader has pursued claims involving "Wild Wild West," "Dukes of Hazzard," "It's Alive," "Smallville" and, reportedly, the upcoming "Get Smart."

He has gone after other studios, including Sony, but his most high-profile cases -- and victories -- have involved Warners. The studio paid "Moonrunners" producer Robert B. Clark a $17.5 million settlement in a case about similarities between that 1974 movie and the bigscreen "The Dukes of Hazzard." And a federal judge ruled earlier in the Siegels' favor over "Smallville," although that was challenged and the case still being resolved.

The studio declined to comment on the latest ruling in favor of their legal nemesis, issuing only a statement noting that, "substantial issues relating to the accounting of profits were ruled in our favor."

Among these issues: international profits, trademark-related revs and profits stemming from Superman fare produced before 1999, when Siegel's heirs terminated the earlier copyright arrangement under a 1976 law.

To the Siegels, Toberoff's legal maneuvers are nothing short of heroic. The family had been destitute for years after Siegel sold rights to his Man of Steel to Detective Comics for $130. DC Comics had started to pony up more monies after Warners made successful movies based on the character, but Siegel had long wished to redress the fact he had gotten so little from his creation; he died in 1996.

Toberoff has set up a production company, Intellectual Properties Worldwide, to develop films around these and other titles. And he has built up a sideline business producing bigscreen adaptations of the projects whose copyright claims he pursues. He has a producing credit on "Fantasy Island," a Sony project for Eddie Murphy, as well as "Sanford and Son."

 

[FlawlessVictory]

A great FAQ that breaks everything down nicely:

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2008/03/30/superman-copyright-faq/

 

[Showtime]

Very good read Flaw.

 

[pwl4life]

that made the most sense of everything I've read so far, thanks.but I say this sucks. I REALLY hope they work something out before it's too late. I mean The Superman Returns Sequel, Justice League, The Superboy DVD's, the last season of Smallville, there's allot of really awesome stuff coming out that could be severely effected by this.

 

[wellsy]

I'd have to say that the family will probably be bought off by a pretty handsome payout, as well as an agreement regarding future domestic revenue.

As for its impact on future Superman titles; given how up in the air they already are, I'd say this really can't change very much, to be honest, since both Justice League and MOS might or might not get made. They both hang on the precipice.

 

[Nightwing1977]

I'd have to say that the family will probably be bought off by a pretty handsome payout, as well as an agreement regarding future domestic revenue.

As for its impact on future Superman titles; given how up in the air they already are, I'd say this really can't change very much, to be honest, since both Justice League and MOS might or might not get made. They both hang on the precipice.

I agree. The families need to forgive the past & move on with the future. DC screw up the 2 creators, but they finally gave them their credits back with STM. That been 30 yrs. & I would like the families to move on. I think some will continue to ask for more royalites & more money, thus getting greedy.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

The only good thing out of this I have seen is that Variety has confirmed a sequel to Superman Returns.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

So what the hell is going on now? Does this ruling effect MOS and JL in a big way?

 

[Showtime]

Yes.