Seigels half-owners of Superman, says Judge.

Joe Kalicki said:
But DC wouldn't lose more than half the rights, is what I'm saying. DC and the Siegels would have to work together to get anything published, unless I missed something.
Click to expand...
Yes, because there's Shuster's nephew.

If he chooses to terminate the contract they did long ago, then DC loses ALL rights to Superman in 2033.
 
Last edited:
A DC universe without Superman.

...

They should hurry up and make a Justice League movie if they're planning on it. And a Superman Sequel because you don't want to have five Superman movies without one of them having Brainiac.
 
Gothamite said:
Anyone can make their own Superman comics or stories or movies or whatever as it is; it's just that you can't make money off of them. That's fine by me.
Click to expand...

That's not how copyrights work. If you don't own the rights, you don't get to do anything with it. Are they likely to come after a kid drawing a mural on their wall or something? No. It would be terrible press. But they absolutely could.

Joe Kalicki said:
But DC wouldn't lose more than half the rights, is what I'm saying. DC and the Siegels would have to work together to get anything published, unless I missed something.
Click to expand...

I think Ice is right - my understanding is that DC has no control over it.
 
E said:
I think Ice is right - my understanding is that DC has no control over it.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are correct.



At the moment, DC only owns half the right to Superman while the appeal goes on. If DC does not win their appeal, Siegels will keep their half of the rights. Now, in 2013, if Shuster's nephew decides to terminate like the Seigels did, then DC/WB has NO CONTROL WHAT-SO-EVER over Superman. And it would stay like that until 2033.

Also, if the appeal does not go through, DC/WB has to pay the Seigels money they owe for using Superman starting in 1999-current. No idea if this would apply to the Shusters in 2013.
 
Ice said:
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.
Click to expand...

Reactions in the fan community have been wildly split, ranging from pronounced elation on behalf of the Siegels, who've been involved in litigation for a decade, to shocking displays of corporate idolatry in support of DC parent Time Warner, an entity that's profited immensely on its initial investment of just $130, which is what Siegel & Shuster were paid for their copyrights.
Click to expand...

WOW.

And I'm not sure some of you understand the ramifications of this; how huge this is.
 
Joe Kalicki said:
I assume DC will still own the trademark to Superman, which means no one else could publish a book with that title.
Click to expand...
But there's a loopwhole with that.

They might not be able to use the title if DC does keep the TM, but they could still use the character.

It's like Marvel's Captain Marvel and DC's Captain Marvel. Since Marvel has the TM, DC can't have books with the character's name as a series title, but they can still use him no matter what. Which is why all of DC's Captain Marvel books are "Shazam!".
 
Ice said:
But there's a loopwhole with that.

They might not be able to use the title if DC does keep the TM, but they could still use the character.

It's like Marvel's Captain Marvel and DC's Captain Marvel. Since Marvel has the TM, DC can't have books with the character's name as a series title, but they can still use him no matter what. Which is why all of DC's Captain Marvel books are "Shazam!".
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know. But a Superman book without the title Superman automatically has a strike against it with the general public. Plus the fact that DC could also be publishing a book called SUPERMAN at the same time is another strike.
 
The lawyer in the article Ice posted should have addressed that. I would assume that the trademark and copyright go hand in hand but I don't know how exactly.
 
I want someone very intelligent to sit me down and explain the impact this could have on DC comics in the years to come, because I am still hella confused.
 
Last edited:
Dr.Strangefate said:
I want someone very intelligent to sit me down and explain the impact this could have on DC comics in the years to come, because I am still hella confused.
Click to expand...

It depends on how it all plays out in the end.

At it's most basic, it could be one of two scenarios. Either DC is totally no longer allowed to publish Superman stories (not very likely, but possible), or they do and have to pay the creators a LOT of money to do so, because the alternative is worse. If they did I could see maybe fewer Superman books, possibly, but who knows. It's pretty hard to say at this point.

The biggest thing is when the copyright expires completely and he goes to public domain, which will happen if the appeals fail. And if that's the case, DC can do whatever they want with him. But so can anyone else.
 
Y'know, i'm of two minds on this;

It's quite obvious the Siegel family is only doing this **** as a money making scheme. When on Fox Noise, the nephew crowed about the financial victory, with no mention of protecting the legacy.

on the other hand


People are far too paranoid at the idea of Public Domain Superman. This will not ruin the character in any noticeable way. I mean, seriously, a great example is the Japanese doujinshi industry. While not completely legal, it far from ruins the original characters/stories. Hell, certain mainstream genre of manga blossomed from the doujin market (eg: Yuri/Yaoi, crossover). Many successful mangaka get their foot into the industry via the doujin market.

So honestly, I think it'd benefit the US comic industry if it loosened its copyright stranglehold and encourage fanworks.


Hell, I know tons of girls that would buy Clark/Bruce yaoi doujin.
 
E said:
That's not how copyrights work. If you don't own the rights, you don't get to do anything with it. Are they likely to come after a kid drawing a mural on their wall or something? No. It would be terrible press. But they absolutely could.
Click to expand...

So...fanfiction is illegal? You learn something new...

skotti-chan said:
Y'know, i'm of two minds on this;

It's quite obvious the Siegel family is only doing this **** as a money making scheme. When on Fox Noise, the nephew crowed about the financial victory, with no mention of protecting the legacy.
Click to expand...

That's a lot of bull****. This isn't just some thing that happened over night as a quick, money-making scheme. Jerry and Joe have been trying to get their fair share for the better part of 50 years. It's not just about money, it's about what's right and for that, I have respect for the Siegels.

I just hope to God in heaven that the whole thing doesn't result in my favourite fictional character ever (joint with Batman) being lost forever, or worse, the franchise and concept becoming so diluted by copies and 'alternate' versions that people stop caring.

People are far too paranoid at the idea of Public Domain Superman. This will not ruin the character in any noticeable way. I mean, seriously, a great example is the Japanese doujinshi industry. While not completely legal, it far from ruins the original characters/stories. Hell, certain mainstream genre of manga blossomed from the doujin market (eg: Yuri/Yaoi, crossover). Many successful mangaka get their foot into the industry via the doujin market.
Click to expand...

:cry:

Zombipanda said:
or the Care Bears
Click to expand...

:cry:

Venom Melendez said:
Or baywatch
Click to expand...

:cry:

All I'm saying is...Siegels & Shusters: have a heart. Superman has become far bigger than just some funnybook creation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top