Siegel & Shuster vs WB: Superman and Infinite Crisis

[Abraham]

I don't care about the origin, as long as they are able to have the costume, alter-ego Clark Kent, feisty reporter Lois Lane, their jobs at the Daily Planet and Lex Luthor (as well as the Kent's (hopefully still alive), Jimmy, Perry, and a big shot villain - a Brainiac or Mongul.

 

[Webhead2006]

yea thats what i been wondering myself since we know what the heirs have compared to what wb still owns. i still hope even if the film itself isnt a full on origin deal, we at least gloss over some origin items. cause as i said in other threads whats the point in doing a reboot if we cant use all the elements in the film. we loose out on stuff we can do and set up and character interactions and all that.

 

[Kal El Vis]

The Siegels own and control;

*depictions of Superman’s origins from the planet Krypton
*his parents Jor-L and Lora
*Superman as the infant Kal-L
*the launching of the infant Superman into space by his parents as Krypton explodes and his landing on Earth in a fiery crash.
*the basis of 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.

Actually, they own everything that was in Action Comics #1, which does NOT include the Daily Planet. I believe he worked for the "Daily Star" in 1938.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Star_(DC_Comics)

Superman co-creator Joe Shuster named the Daily Star after the Toronto Daily Star in Ontario, which had been the newspaper that Shuster's parents received and for which Shuster had worked as a paperboy.

The "S" they do own is this one:

Warner Bros. owns:

 

[louiebling$]

http://www.deadline.com/2010/05/shocker-warner-bros-now-suing-superman-rights-lawyer/WB

 

[louiebling$]

O Boy....
http://www.deadline.com/2010/05/shocker-warner-bros-now-suing-superman-rights-lawyer/

 

[louiebling$]

O Boy...


http://www.deadline.com/2010/05/shocker-warner-bros-now-suing-superman-rights-lawyer/

Mods I tried posting this in the S&S vs WB Thread but its not working

 

[GreenKToo]

Uh oh. Still, I don't think?? this will interfere with the reboot tho.

 

[NotFadeAway]

You know, there is a part of me that wants WB to lose the rights to Superman. It's been blunder after blunder after blunder with these idiots. You had the Reeve movies, and only one and half of those were any good and they all that is now as dated as dated can get. Then, these wack pack of fools spent the 90's and first half of the 2000's trying to take the character of Superman in name only and make him something different, i.e. Tim Burton's hack ass being involved with the franchise and Jon Peters wet dreams of Neo-Superman. Then when that failed, they turned to a guy who ended up making a bland sequel to a dated, 25 year old movie. Great. The only good thing thats happened to this character outside of the comics is Superman:The Animated Series. How come the Green Lantern gets Ryan Reynolds, Peter Skarsgard, Tim Robbins, Martin Campbell, and an origin story and Superman gets stuck with all the crap it's been given? I'm happy for Green Lantern, but I'm a bit jealous as well.

But at the same time, if the WB loses the rights to Superman, then the movie wouldn't take place in the true DC universe and we would never get a JLA film.

 

[Doc Ock]

Oh snap! Go Warner Bros?

 

[BestGirl]

Uh oh. Still, I don't think?? this will interfer with the reboot tho.

It had better not. I've been counting on seeing a Superman movie in 2012 or 2013.

 

[solidsnake86]

You know, there is a part of me that wants WB to lose the rights to Superman. It's been blunder after blunder after blunder with these idiots. You had the Reeve movies, and only one and half of those were any good and they all that is now as dated as dated can get. Then, these wack pack of fools spent the 90's and first half of the 2000's trying to take the character of Superman in name only and make him something different, i.e. Tim Burton's hack ass being involved with the franchise and Jon Peters wet dreams of Neo-Superman. Then when that failed, they turned to a guy who ended up making a bland sequel to a dated, 25 year old movie. Great. The only good thing thats happened to this character outside of the comics is Superman:The Animated Series. How come the Green Lantern gets Ryan Reynolds, Peter Skarsgard, Tim Robbins, Martin Campbell, and an origin story and Superman gets stuck with all the crap it's been given? I'm happy for Green Lantern, but I'm a bit jealous as well.

But at the same time, if the WB loses the rights to Superman, then the movie wouldn't take place in the true DC universe and we would never get a JLA film.

Really NotFadeAway, that part of you that wants WB to loose the rights sounds like the biggest fanboy talk I have ever heard. Just because they haven't been able to produce a movie that you enjoy they should loose the rights? You realize the movies aren't everything and superman is a product used over different mediums. If WB loose the rights to superman you wont be seeing the character the same way again, including that S shield which probably would make more money then the siegles owning the name clark kent and krypton blowing up. Each side holds key elements and I would even say WB has the more important ones.

As for this newest development, you have to hand it to Wb's new lawyer as thats a smart move in sueing toberoff to get him to step down.

 

[The Batman]

Really NotFadeAway, that part of you that wants WB to loose the rights sounds like the biggest fanboy talk I have ever heard. Just because they haven't been able to produce a movie that you enjoy they should loose the rights? You realize the movies aren't everything and superman is a product used over different mediums. If WB loose the rights to superman you wont be seeing the character the same way again, including that S shield which probably would make more money then the siegles owning the name clark kent and krypton blowing up. Each side holds key elements and I would even say WB has the more important ones.

As for this newest development, you have to hand it to Wb's new lawyer as thats a smart move in sueing toberoff to get him to step down.

This. The only reason we got the bland SR was because of Fanboy backlash when WB tried to make a reboot origin that didnt retread anything. IMO, WB assumed SR was the movie fans wanted: a safe flick based of a movie people liked with a safe proven choice for director.

Not to mention we got Nolan working on this flick, and they HAVE to have a flick in development by next year

 

[Webhead2006]

oh boy, man why oh way does this character have to be in such legal problems. I really do want to see the whole legal messes over with and everyone gets something good out of it.

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

yea, this whole back and forth legal issues Superman has been having for the better part of, well, forever, is really running its course. Enough is enough already, just settle the damn thing once and for all.

 

[Timstuff]

As they say, "whatever works." Even if this is a below-the-belt tactic, if there is legal grounds for the Siegels' and Schusters' lawyet to be dismissed then I don't see why he shouldn't be, and more importantly, I do not want to lose Superman as he has existed for the last 70 years. He'll end up being like Popeye or Betty Boop, where you'll occasionally see his likeness but not in the way we do currently. He'll be a retro 1930's character, not the iconic man of steel that has graced the pages of DC's comics for nearly a century. We'll have a prototypical version of Superman, not the one we know and love. Heck, I'd be surprised if we still had Superman comics in any form if DC and Warner Bros. lose all rights to the character.

 

[The Batman]

^ Exactly, which is why its straight up foolish to want DC to lose the rights.

 

[Webhead2006]

totally from what it seems in the end what ever the siegels will have rights to wb will have to pay to use those elements in comics/cartoons/tv shows/movies in the future. So it would be best for all parties to just make a dam deal between everyone and be done with it.

 

[Micromind]

I am against handing out boat loads of money (in terms of getting a percentage of ownership of Superman rights, what does Toberoff get in 2013, when all US rights to Superman as he existed in Action Comics #1, get ? a Whopping 47% ) to some legal eagle, for doing his job as a lawyer, he has not contributed in a Creative way to Superman, has he ever written a story, drawn, directed a Supes movie, or acted in one ? NO ?

Then why does he deserve to get any percentage of Ownership? I think WB will not let this happen and sit quietly, things are bound to get ugly and dirty in legal battle now.

 

[MG87]

Imagine if this causes a delay in DC's movie plans. What a joke.

 

[batlovescatDC]

I don't think that this will effect the reboot. As long as they can get it into some type of production by the end of this yr, the ship will be sailing and nothing will be able to be done about it. I do think, however, just to clear the water and make sure the new series can continue after the reboot and to make sure that the characters' comics contiuum won't be threatened... WB, DC, and the Siegels/Shusters should come to some type of agreement/deal and finalize it. It'd make much more sense and that way everything can continue smoothly without issue.

I dismiss my case. Lol.

 

[bgshw44]

it wont effect it at all. wb is not taking a chance on a court ruling to give them back what they could lose if they dont go into production by 2011

 

[Webhead2006]

this is why i rather a licensing deal be worked out with the siegels/shusters, so wb/dc pays them a reasonable sum fee yearly to continue to use superman fully. So wb has full usage of superman, and the heirs come off making money. its a hopefully win/win deal for all parties.

 

[dark_b]

you are aware that one of the reasons why they are making superman for 2012 with Nolan is because of the legal problems?

its been 4 years since Superman returns. thank god for 2012.

can you imagine waiting another 6-8 years? nevah

 

[Webhead2006]

oh i know they are doing the film as a preempted measure over more legal stuff. but i rather wish all the legal stuff would be over with. So it wouldnt cause any more continued issues with the character.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I hope Toberoff loses this case, the man is nothing but scum who is taking advantage of Siegels.