Siegel's Family Reclaims Share of Superman Rights - May effect JLA

if the family gets the money you can be sure that in 30 years they will want more.

Only if the big corporations lobby to extend the copyright law again. That's the irony of this situation.

http://blog.newsarama.com/2008/06/29/superboy-settlement-update/ seems to indicate that there's been an extension to the settlement negotiations due to conflicting schedules. Personally, I think both sides are holding out for the "last best offer" before settling.
 
if the family gets the money you can be sure that in 30 years they will want more.
Probably but would both siegels wife and daughter still be alive thought in 30 yrs time? I do hope everything gets settled with the siegels and they get the money siegel is rightly owed. Them same goes for when shuster's heir can go to court. Hopefully things work out and the families decide to leave superman at wb/dc so it can continue and make the money there and they just walk away with a big paycheck from wb/dc every year on the character's profits.
 
Probably but would both siegels wife and daughter still be alive thought in 30 yrs time? I do hope everything gets settled with the siegels and they get the money siegel is rightly owed. Them same goes for when shuster's heir can go to court. Hopefully things work out and the families decide to leave superman at wb/dc so it can continue and make the money there and they just walk away with a big paycheck from wb/dc every year on the character's profits.

The rights would just get passed on to their heirs.
 
Well the siegels its only his wife who is pretty old and the daughter who is what like in 50s. So on siegels side that all thats left right? As for shuster's heir it is only his nephew who is the only heir on that side i believe.
 
Well the siegels its only his wife who is pretty old and the daughter who is what like in 50s. So on siegels side that all thats left right? As for shuster's heir it is only his nephew who is the only heir on that side i believe.

We just don't know that. Nothing is mentioned about her immediate family since it is just her and her mother on the suit (although she is married). Apparently she suffered from MS back in 1994. If she didn't have children before that time, it might be doubtful if she ever did. I guess only time will tell. According to this article, Jerry Seigel had two grand children. Whether it was from his daughter or his son (who is not named in the suit), his heirs will live on for at lease another generation or two.
 
Yea alot is unknown with what is going to happen and all that. I do really hope everything works out with the siegels and if shusters's heir gets the other 50% copyright share that both families decide to just leave it at wb/dc were all the money on the character is coming from and just sit back and recieve big paychecks from wb/dc every year for the profits made off the character. Its a better decision then taking 1938 superman version and trying to take it else were no other company would probably want to use that version if they cant use all the 70 year history.
 
I just want to see Superman teamed up along with his long time friends and fellow heroes. Not with anybody else.
 
Yea so hopefully things work out come 2013 and superman is still with wb/dc and can stay there and the siegels and shusters just take their big paychecks.
 
Yea so hopefully things work out come 2013 and superman is still with wb/dc and can stay there and the siegels and shusters just take their big paychecks.
I believe the Siegel's attorney has his own film production company, so there may be more it than just collecting paychecks.
 
True but its been stated if the siegels and shusters take superman from wb/dc it would only be the 1938 version of the character with out all the other 70 year history background. Really who would want a 1938 superman film or 1938 superman now in comics it wouldnt go over all that well and fans wouldnt want to see that.
 
I agree that from our point of view, the most logical course of action the Siegels could take is to fashion a lucrative agreement with WB/DC on profit sharing. Making a Superman movie without all the DC stuff would not be what most fans of the character would want to see. But such a movie, if done right (and with maybe a little luck), could be made to work profitably for them. As far as I know, they have not stated what their ultimate goal is except to reclaim the rights to Superman. If they said that all they wanted was to reclaim the rights in order to get a fair share of any profits earned by WB/DC for use of the Superman character, then I'd feel a bit better. But what I fear is that the Siegels have been sold on some idea by their attorney to develop a Superman franchise themselves, without WB/DC. However unlikely that scenario is, it's still a possibility, and though some might welcome that idea, I don't.

The other side is WB's point of view. If the Siegels are allowed to keep a large percentage of the profits by the courts, will WB want to risk large sums of money on future movies involving the character, especially solo films? WB's attorneys might also be taking a no-negotiation hardline stance on the issue, especially if they feel they've been wronged by the judge.

I have a feeling that whatever the outcome of the November trial, it won't be the end of the litigation, especially if WB comes out on the short end. What a mess.
 
Yea very good post and good points you bring up biolumen. It would be alot better to leave superman were it is and for the families to just get money. But we have to wait and see what happene with the trail as u said in nov and then what ever goes down in 2013 with shuster's heir.
 
I believe the Siegel's attorney has his own film production company, so there may be more it than just collecting paychecks.

The guy's in the business of encouraging the creators of properties to sue for the creative or film rights and he gets 33% of the settlement. That's how he's made his living over the years and he seems to be pretty successful at it. I understand that he's going to be representing the Shusters when they have their suit.
 
'Lassie' heirs regain rights
Court decision reverses Classic Media win

By JANET SHPRINTZ

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held Friday that the daughter of Eric Knight, the author of "Lassie Come Home," has the right to terminate Classic Media's copyrights in the classic story of a boy and his dog.

Friday's decision reverses Classic Media's win on summary judgment in the lower court.

The court's opinion addressed a complicated issue of copyright law involving whether the law's termination of transfer right is eradicated by a post-1978 assignment of the rights. In a victory for authors and their heirs, the court held that their rights are not terminated.

As outlined in the 25-page decision, Knight granted rights to make the television series to a predecessor to Classic in 1940. Knight's heirs renewed the copyrights in the 1960s. Classic obtained an assignment of rights from Winifred Knight Mewborn, one of Knight's three daughters who also assigned their rights in 1976, and an additional grant of ancillary rights only from Mewborn in 1978 for $3,000.

In 1996, Mewborn served a termination notice, and Classic claimed that she didn't have the right to terminate the copyright under copyright law. After years of vituperative letters, Classic finally sued in 2005, seeking a declaration of rights. Reversing the lower court, the 9th Circuit held that the 1976 Copyright Act intended to benefit heirs, and Mewborn's post-1978 assignment did not terminate her rights.

"Seventy years after Eric Knight first penned his tale of the devoted Lassie who struggled to come home, at least some of the fruits of his labors will benefit his daughter," concluded the 9th Circuit.

Mewborn, who is now 87, was represented by Marc Toberoff, who has scored a series of wins on behalf of rights holders and their heirs, including high-profile cases involving "Dukes of Hazzard" and "Superman."
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117988870.html?categoryId=13&cs=1
 
The article doesn't mean anything except to point out that this attorney Marc Toberoff is pretty good at what he does.

My question is, is this the same Marc Toberoff who's film producer credits include 'I Spy' and 'Bottle Shock', the latter to be released in August, and is attached as producer for a Piranha remake (Piranha 3-D)?

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0864844/
 
But so far, the Siegel family is winning in terms of owning the rights to Superman in Oct 2013. I just hope that WB makes at least one more Superman movie before then.
 
I agree that from our point of view, the most logical course of action the Siegels could take is to fashion a lucrative agreement with WB/DC on profit sharing. Making a Superman movie without all the DC stuff would not be what most fans of the character would want to see. But such a movie, if done right (and with maybe a little luck), could be made to work profitably for them. As far as I know, they have not stated what their ultimate goal is except to reclaim the rights to Superman. If they said that all they wanted was to reclaim the rights in order to get a fair share of any profits earned by WB/DC for use of the Superman character, then I'd feel a bit better. But what I fear is that the Siegels have been sold on some idea by their attorney to develop a Superman franchise themselves, without WB/DC. However unlikely that scenario is, it's still a possibility, and though some might welcome that idea, I don't.

True.

I'd like them both to wok out an agreement where Superman stays with WB/DC but they get more access to the profits of the franchise. Everyone wins with that.

The other side is WB's point of view. If the Siegels are allowed to keep a large percentage of the profits by the courts, will WB want to risk large sums of money on future movies involving the character, especially solo films? WB's attorneys might also be taking a no-negotiation hardline stance on the issue, especially if they feel they've been wronged by the judge.

I'd say yes.

The films, while profitable, are the tip of iceberg with the profits from the Superman franchise. It's the merchandising and various mediums like comics, novels, tv shows, animated movies, video-games and cartoons to consider. If Superman leaves those dry up completely.

I have a feeling that whatever the outcome of the November trial, it won't be the end of the litigation, especially if WB comes out on the short end. What a mess.

Agreed.
 
The films, while profitable, are the tip of iceberg with the profits from the Superman franchise. It's the merchandising and various mediums like comics, novels, tv shows, animated movies, video-games and cartoons to consider. If Superman leaves those dry up completely.
Your right. I was basically thinking of just the movies. Though anything is possible, it's hard to imagine the Siegels giving up their share of the monies coming in through those other mechanisms.

And just to answer my own question, that film producer Marc Toberoff is the attorney Marc Toberoff.
 
i believe that is true right bio marc toberoof and is a film producer and lawer. As i said hopefully wb/dc doesnt loose supes come 2013 when shuster heir goes to court. Hopefully the families and wb/dc can work out agreements to continue sharing the character and they get money off it. But we dont know what is going to happen. But the big sticking point is this lawer guy as other said in posts above he is good at what he does so that does look good to wb. But its all really up to the judge.
 
I heard that was the pitch that Steve from SaveSuperman.com was submitting to WB.
Superman vs Kryptonite Lassie.
Starring Tom Welling.
As Lassie.
 
That was funny, but a Lassie vs. Krypto film would have been a better pitch.
 
lol that is funny but we should diss the people who are trying to do pitchs, that steve guy has a nice idea and hopefull wb takes him and all the other people making pitchs seriously taken.
 
If he is really involved with WB, why would he have to create an "intentional leak" of a script and artwork, and claim it was unintentional? I would think if somebody was working on a project with a major studio, they would pretty much have a gag order and not be allowed to openly talk about a project.

He emailed a handful of webmasters 6 pages of his script and the artwork. The artwork was pretty cool, somebody told me Phil did it, but I don't know if that is true.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"