Warner Bros wins latest round of Superman rights battle
The Superman rights battle continues to go Warner Bros' way, paving the way for the release of Man Of Steel this summer...
The messy, ongoing legal battle between Warner Bros and the heirs of the Superman character's creators shows little sign of stopping, and the latest round has gone in the studio's favour.
Warner Bros had reportedly been reticent to push ahead with its Justice League movie project while legal battles were ongoing, and it scored a crucial victory in the Ninth Circuit Court Of Appeal back in January. The ruling, that upheld a deal Warner Bros and the estate of Jerome Siegel that had been done in 2001, gave the studio the control it wanted over Superman, and it was full steam ahead.
The latest round of the legal fight has now seen a federal judge also confirm that 2001 deal, and paves the way for Warner Bros to release this summer's Man Of Steel without legal fuss. That's thanks to a further ruling made this week.
But there may yet be further problems for the studio. Judge Wright added this week that there's a "lingering issue of what to do with Superboy and the early Superman ads", and The Hollywood Reporter suggests there may yet be the issue of TV shows such as Smallville to consider.
The 2001 deal that's been referred to was when Warner Bros inked a deal with the widow of Jerome Siegel, compensating her for the rights to Superman that her husband had, in the eyes of the law, sold. That deal was thrown into doubt though, when in 2008, the estates of the Superman creators won a big ruling, that seemed to give them the rights to the Superman backstory (factoring in the 1976 copyright act). That 2008 ruling was overturned earlier this year.
This all leaves Warner Bros in pole position as far as Superman is concerned, and it looks as if it's just got some legal mopping up work to do, and a few more cheques to write, before the rights issue is settled for good. But don't be surprised if there aren't yet more twists and turns...
Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here
Disqus - noscript
This really is pathetic. The creators of superman sold the character thinking it would never make any money and then once it did they wanted some. Now their families are still trying to get money for something that is nothing to do with them. It isn't warner Bro's/DC's fault they saw potential in something it's creators didn't.
No, but it is their fault that they saw fit to pay such a paltry sum for it...
thats business tbh would you go into a car shop and say Ill pay a few thousand for for a car as I think ur underselling it! no you wouldnt
DC are scum.
And Marvel.
A paltry sum that the creators were happy to take at the time.
Well, it really is too bad if the creators' families aren't getting properly compensated.
But it would also be bad if this movie was blocked as a result.
Probably because they were desperate.
I don't think anyone would argue that it's good from a business point of view, but it still sucks from a moral standpoint. They took advantage of two people who were down on their luck and desperate for whatever they could get, can you really blame their families for being so sore about it? Ultimately, the families will probably lose, and rightfully so from a legal perspective I guess, but it doesn't change the fact that Warner Bros/DC's behaviour in this affair was pretty disgraceful.
I wish the battle for the 1960s Batman TV show could be dealt with, while some are still alive to be able to do commentaries for... it was a cultural phenomenon as well...
Without Siegel and Shuster there wouldn't be a Superman for Warner Bros and DC to rake in lots of cash from. Ergo, give their families a better deal. End of story.
First of all there is no evidence that they took advantage of anyone. DC has been intermittently paying the families of Siegel and Shuster for years. Yes it would be easy for Warner to cut a check for say a million each for both families but once that happens, there would be no end to it. As far as the courts are concerned, the IP was sold. DC is under no obligation to do anything further. What DC wants and what the families want is a definitive answer to when the rights expire, how much the rights are worth and whether or not the original deal was legally binding. Superman has NOT been a cash cow for DC. The property is nothing like the Batman property. All you can say about the Superman property is that it has provided a lot of jobs to a lot of artists over the years and has a tremendous name recognition. Superman had two film successes and that was basically it. I don't count Smallville because (and I feel the courts will show) that the property is tangentially related to Superman and not a direct descendant of the IP. Otherwise, Superman has been a lukewarm money maker at best.
The deal was fair and square, sure now the franchise is worth billions, never EVER sell the intellectual property of your characters to a corporation then go crying for more money, i dont even know how this got to courts, those must be some crafty lawyers, on the other hand warner should really REALLY think about giving the family either one big payday (8 figures at least) or negotiate a yearly payout (percentage is OUT of the question but this at least would shut them up, save them the tiny risk of losing in court and look good in the eyes of the people)
As far as your legal points go, I mostly agree with you, but boy, oh boy, there is some amazing bull in your post too.
"Superman has NOT been a cash cow for DC. Superman had two film successes and that was basically it."
The first film alone grossed over $300 million worldwide... I beg your pardon? I'm not even going to bother looking up the box office stats for the other films because that alone is enough to make your argument look stupid. I don't think you realise just how big a deal two successful blockbusters was for a comic books publisher at the time.
Comics wise, Superman is and has been one of the most iconic comics in American history. I can't be bothered to look up its profit margins, but I'm willing to bet they're not as bad as you make out.
Lukewarm money maker, my arse.
Not really. The recent Superman history by Larry Tye is an eye opener. They were both extremely well paid.