Judge Says Siegels Now Own Half of Superman

[CBR News]

SUPER SIMPLE: Copyright Lawyer talks Siegel Decision

Intellectual property attorney and frequent Comic-Con speaker Brendan McFeely breaks it down for CBR News about the landmark "Action Comics" ruling and what it means for Superman, DC Comics, and beyond.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/ne...m.cgi?id=13528

[NotSuper]

Huh. So, theoretically, if the Siegels were to publish their own Superman comic, they'd have to share the profits with DC (and vice-versa, of course). If true, it might be in the Siegels' best interest to not start their own comic and instead sit back and let the money roll in.

On the other hand, isn't there a provision that states one must actually do something with a copyright or eventually lose it?

[Ratwedge]

Its good for the families that they are getting their dues and see them get what they are entitled to. While I am happy for them, I would think it would be funny to see them try and pawn off his rights to other studios.


Yet sadly for the Sigels I cant really see them transfering him over to another medium without people going "Huh, is that superman? Wheres this and that?". I mean he would without what DC owns be just another Majestic in some random universe no one cares about.

[CMBMOOL]

Now Let me get this straight, so either way the families of the creators of Superman are now this close to destory all of the Big 2 ? :(

[ggersten]

The intereview is okay, but has an error.
A google search reveals that Joe Simon's claim to the copyright on Captain America was settled in 2003. I don't know if Kirby's Estate has a claim.
The other character with some value would be Namor.
Johnny Storm and the original Human Torch would be an interesting dilemma.
The thing is that most of the older comics characters don't have the value of Superman or Batman or even Wonder Woman.

[Jmacq1]

Coming in 2009: The (semi permanent) return of Electro-Superman!

[The Batman]

No that's wrong. Superman Returns was a movie that was the 8th slowest to get to 200 million. whereas Batman Begins had strong strong word of mouth which is why it was in theatres longer and then had massive DVD sales.

. . . and worldwide it made less money at the box office even with the extra time and all that positive word of mouth.

So it would seem that, around the world, more people want to see a Superman movie, even one that according to you wasn't receiving good word-of-mouth, than a Batman one.

There was also other thing such as the fact marketing people were talking about the poor performance of the merchandising of Superman Returns, toys weren't being bought that much and the video game didn't do too well.

I don't blame people for that. I hardly got any of the merchandise either because most of it just wasn't very good. I'm not going to spend money on a crap video game or action poorly made action figures just because Superman is on them.

I did the same thing with most all of the Batman Begins merchandise too.

[The Batman]

what the hell? You and the 13 year olds on supermanhomepage are the only people that believe this. The Guys on Chud wrote an article debunking this exact quote about a year ago. That it isn't an indicator of how close they are in popularity. The DVD sales for batman begins were huge compared to superman returns, because of the strong word of mouth. The Dark Knight is the most anticipated movie this year, even more than Indy 4. A sequel was actually greenlit virtually when the movie came out, can we say the same thing for Superman Returns? Facts are facts and you are wrong.

Chud debunked the myth that Hollywood is a business looking to make money did it?

$150,000,000 with a $371,000,000 return versus $240,000,000 with a $391,000,000 return - which seems like the safer place to put your next $150,000,000?

Oh and why don't we lump some of the sales of those Ultimate Superman Movie Set, you know the one that had all the movies including Superman Returns, into those DVD sales. I'm willing to bet alot of people just got that instead of the Superman Returns solo release. I know I did.

Or maybe we should compare the sales on the Smallville DVDs to the DVD sales for Batman's current primetime show? Oh wait . . .

[The Batman]

SUPER SIMPLE: Copyright Lawyer talks Siegel Decision

Intellectual property attorney and frequent Comic-Con speaker Brendan McFeely breaks it down for CBR News about the landmark "Action Comics" ruling and what it means for Superman, DC Comics, and beyond.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/ne...m.cgi?id=13528

Good article, this and Cronin's FAQ are helping to make all this legalese a little more clear.

One thing though, from reading this, I'm more and more getting the feeling that this isn't going to be something that DC/Time-Warner will be able to make go away with a cheque, even a very big one.

[Grazzt]

On the other hand, isn't there a provision that states one must actually do something with a copyright or eventually lose it?

Not a lawyer, but I think that only applies to trademark.

[Slam_Bradley]

Not a lawyer, but I think that only applies to trademark.

This is correct. Copyrights last for the statutory period of time regardless of their "use." Trademarks expire if they aren't used.

[ColonelLee]

Its good for the families that they are getting their dues and see them get what they are entitled to. While I am happy for them, I would think it would be funny to see them try and pawn off his rights to other studios.


Yet sadly for the Sigels I cant really see them transfering him over to another medium without people going "Huh, is that superman? Wheres this and that?". I mean he would without what DC owns be just another Majestic in some random universe no one cares about.

The Superman of Action #1 is what the Fleischer cartoons were based on. I like that Superman just fine. Wouldn't mind seeing more stories done in that vein.

[BoosterBronze]

The Superman of Action #1 is what the Fleischer cartoons were based on. I like that Superman just fine. Wouldn't mind seeing more stories done in that vein.

That was my first thought as well!

To add fire to the Superman/Batman popularity debate... I don't recall seeing multiple versions of "Indian Batman."

[Shellhead]

Could the Siegels negotiate a deal to allow Marvel to use Superman, and then pay half the proceeds to DC?

[Sandy Hausler]

I wonder if Jusge Stephen G. Larson is any relation to Jack Larson, who paid Jimmy Olson on the Superman TV show. Superman's Pal, indeed.

Sandy Hausler