Is Superman Super Screwed in 2013?
July 13th, 2009
Last week news hit the Internet about how Warner Bros. and DC Comics have won a favorable ruling in a suit filed by the heirs of “Superman” co-creator Jerome Siegel. The short of it is the following (Variety):
In a decision announced Wednesday, U.S. Judge District Court Judge Stephen G. Larson found that the license fees the studio paid to corporate sibling DC Comics didn’t represent “sweetheart” deals as they weren’t below fair market value. That means the heirs will be able seek profits only from DC Comics — which earned $13.6 million from Warner Bros. for the 2006 release of “Superman Returns” — rather than from Warner Bros. as well.
You can read the whole thing on a couple news sites now, but to me, none of them still make much sense or spend time on what is going to be the more exciting revelation of the next decade. The back-and-forth lawsuit stuff tires me. Why? Because I don’t understand how all these numbers and percentages work or get split or shared and how both sides can ever settle on ANY agreement on this topic–I only understand that these kinds of legal battles have been happening for DECADES! It leaves me feeling a little saddened that the creators of Superman DIED before seeing any of this getting resolved in a way that was “fair” at least in everyone’s eyes.
Let me be clear about some past facts before getting into my rant about this:
- Siegel and Shuster signed a contract signing off the copyright of Superman for $130 seventy years ago when they started working for DC Comics.
- In 1976, Congress enabled creators and their heirs to terminate the assignment of copyright executed before January 1, 1978, unless the copyright was in a work made for hire. This was done in order to allow creators and their heirs to re-negotiate when the value of their work was more apparent.
- Siegel and Shuster became co-copyright holders on the property but only insofar as it related to, or built on, the material that appeared in Action Comics #1. The most relevent ownership possibly being his costume (Brought up in the rant below)
- Many of the Superman-specific elements that we know today never appeared in Action Comics #1: Kryptonite, Lex Luthor, Metropolis, Fortress of Solitude or even the Bottle City of Kandor as the most important perhaps. His array of powers didn’t include flying, or super-breath, or heat vision. (Brought up in the rant below)
The fact that Superman and the copyright issue surrounding him has been a disaster for decades (see Wikipedia, “Copyright Issues” section on its Superman page) is not as well known to the general audience as it could–or SHOULD be–but it’s finally going to get drawn out into pretty epic media attention in the next 5 years. In 2013, the full copyright rights on Superman get handed to the heirs of Siegel and Shuster.
Attorney Marc Toberoff also asserted in a written statement that the Siegel heirs and the heirs of co-creator Joe Shuster will own the entire Superman copyright in 2013. (Variety)
Once I read this line of news on July 9th, I tweeted confusion to the general public in half-shock and expected a torrent of tweets and additional blogs about this reality; one that would legally REMOVE Superman from DC’s control; one that would allow the heirs of Siegel and Shuster to license off use of the character to ANYONE who would pay for the rights!
I’m shocked to notice that no one is really talking about this at all. It’s like I read something that wasn’t true or maybe misinterpreted the details. I’d have to believe that for what it’s worth, DC has been unfair to the creators for decades, legal battle after legal battle, and I just can’t see this being a smooth as DC paying whatever is asked of them for continued use of their LEADING PROPERTY. I want to be devil’s advocate here for a second and point out a fact from Wikipedia:
in 1975 after news reports of their pauper-like existences, Warner Communications gave Siegel and Shuster lifetime pensions of $20,000 per year and health care benefits. Jay Emmett, then executive vice president of Warner Bros., was quoted in the New York Times as stating, “There is no legal obligation, but I sure feel there is a moral obligation on our part.” Heidi MacDonald, writing for Publisher’s Weekly, noted that in addition to this pension “Warner agreed that Siegel and Shuster would henceforth be credited as creators of Superman on all comics, TV shows and films”.
It’s worth saying that DC or Warner didn’t HAVE to give them anything. They were not legally obligated but they took an stand based on morals. One would counter point this fact again by pointing out that the Superman property makes MILLIONS every year… but… that’s when the complications of this entire hoo-haa come into play.
If I was the estate of Siegel and Shuster I’d probably have more than a little animosity. I might full-out deny DC further use of the character and instead get money from it’s competitors. It’s dirty thinking, but come on, am I being ignorantly irrational in this thinking? In any case, this brings me to my final point and observations of the last few months in comics…
A New Age of Supermen: It’s and eagle! It’s a rocket! No! It’s Kryptonians!
Maybe DC has been preparing for this moment though. I mean, think about all the comic book title character changes. Think about the fact that Superman is more or less being prepared to be fully expendable in a continuity that now includes New Krypton (formerly the Bottle on Kendor and fully in DC’s creative rights) and a full world full of beings with Superman’s abilities (Most if not all of which were not part of the original Superman’s abilities). Superman is no longer a unique over-powered character in a world that sees him as a god. He’s just another Kryptonian now and maybe making him leave the DC Universe will be the most explosive, energetic, cataclysmic, infinite final crisis countdown story arch DC can ever tell?
Is this the legal work-around DC will triumphantly walk away with? A work-around that further denies the Siegel and Shuster estates from accessing the financial benefits of a property lost to them for decades? I’m not a lawyer, or proficient in legalese in any way. I’m just a guy waiting to get it straight very soon from people who ARE in the know.
Think about the ramifications though. Imagine the estates started letting the property run wild for commercial gains? Imagine the potential abundance of mediocre or crappy products that will tarnish the TRADEMARK that DC has worked to create in the image that is has today? What kind of flip-flop lawsuits will happen then? DC files a suit claiming “damage of trademark” etc?
At the end of the day, as sorry as I feel for all of the hassle the creators went through, I’m also a bit inclined to side with DC as to where they TOOK the property, what THEY invested to take the character to new creative heights. The Superman we all know today isn’t the leaping strong-guy of 1938–it’s the humble, god-powered symbol of hope and freedom. It leaves me mildly distressed but frantically eager to see where it all goes from here!
– UPDATE: AUGUST 13, 2009 — From SuperHeroFlix.com
Judge Stephen Larson has given Superman’s co-creator Jerry Siegel rights to additional works in the franchise, including the first two weeks of the dailySuperman newspaper comic strip and early issues of both Action Comics and Supermancomics.
According to Variety, this means that the Siegel estate now owns the rights to:
- all depictions of Superman’s origins from the planet Krypton
- his parents Jor-L and Lora
- Superman as the infant Kal-L
- and the launching of the infant Superman into space by his parents as Krypton explodes and his landing on Earth in a fiery crash
DC still owns other important elements like:
- Superman’s vision powers and expanded origins
- Superman’s ability to fly
- the term kryptonite
- the Lex Luthor
- Jimmy Olsen and Perry White characters
Related Posts
!
What’s with people assuming Superman dead? http://ow.ly/hmil and http://ow.ly/hmiH