China’s Wanda Group Agrees To Pay $2.6B For AMC … 
Weinstein Clarifies ‘Sapphires’ Remarks; Best … 
How Agencies Did At This Year’s Upfronts: New … 
BOMBS AWAY! ‘Battleship’ Sinks To $25.3M … 
‘Lawless’ Premieres As The Weinstein Company … 
David Guarascio And Moses Port To Run … 
‘Beasts Of The Southern Wild’ Co-Writer Lucy … 
Fox Searchlight Fetes ‘Beasts Of The Southern … 
D.V. DeVincentis Sinks Teeth Into ‘The Night … 
Universal Buys ‘The Disciple Program’ As Mark … 
‘Madagascar 3′ And A ‘Big Brother’ … 
UPDATE: Facebook’s Big IPO Trading Day Results In A … 
UPFRONTS 2012: The Year Of Underdogs, Comebacks & … 
YRF’s Uday Chopra To Finance Nicole Kidman-Starrer … 
Cannes Swirls With Talk Of Convergence Between Distributors … 
TNT & Lifetime Looking At Cancelled CBS Drama … 
Women Dominate Early Competition Films As Marion Cotillard … 
Doug Liman Reacts To ‘I Just Want My Pants … 
Disney Sets Jesse Wigutow To Script ‘Peter And The … 
Anthony Mackie In Step With ‘Runner Runner’ 
Should You Buy Facebook? A Few Things To Consider Before … 
I don’t understand why the Warner Bros lot wasn’t draped in black starting the middle of this week. Because the studio should be mourning the imminent loss of a shitload of Superman dollars. I’ve finally got my hands on the entire 72-page ruling Wednesday of U.S. District Court Judge Stephen G. Larson who concluded: “After 70 years, Jerome Siegel’s heirs regain what he granted so long ago — the copyright in the Superman material that was published in Action Comics, Vol. 1. What remains is an apportionment of profits, guided in some measure by the rulings contained in this Order, and a trial on whether to include the profits generated by DC Comics’ corporate sibling’s exploitation of the Superman.”
Think about it: Siegel sold the rights to the action hero he created with Joseph Shuster to Detective Comics for $130, and his heirs got back ownership of the character in 1999 and can possibly lay claim to $50+ million of Warner Bros’ and/or its DC Comics’ cash. The Shusters look to clean up before too long, too. If you want all the Superman lawsuit’s juicy background, Portfolio‘s Amy Wallace did a detailed article here.
For instance, Joanne Siegel (who’d been the sketch model for Lois Lane) wrote a 3-page letter back in 2002 to then Time Warner CEO Dick Parsons calling the company “greedy” and “heartless” and acting “just like the Gestapo … your company wants to strip us naked of our legal rights… Is that the reputation you want?” The answer is a resounding yes. Because for years Warner tied with Disney for its aggressive unwillingness to settle these kinds of legal disputes and its absurd eagerness to risk going to court. Its corporate counsel would hire litigation piranhas hungry for billable hours who pledge to make each case go away by exhausting the patience and resources of the creators or rightsholders. It’s a thoroughly effective but completely disgusting way of doing business.
Yet it’s interesting that, especially lately, Warner has lost or settled some very pricey lawsuits, especially those pursued by that Malibu Robin Hood of a litigator, Marc Toberoff, who has taken on Big Media on behalf of creators and their heirs for Superman and Superboy, The Dukes of Hazzard (read about it here), The Wild Wild West, It’s Alive, and so on. The majors both fear him and hate him, with good reason: he’s a relentless opportunist, which is exactly what’s needed.
Finally, lest any rabid Superman fans blame the Siegels or Shusters for fucking up a Superman Returns sequel, or a Justice League of America movie featuring Superman (or not), know this: Warner execs fucked up both all by themselves. There’s been enough backstory surrounding these pics to fill a book. I say there wouldn’t have been if only Superman Returns had been any good…
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ...
IF not DC, then the only two people that deserved to own SUperman were Shuster and Siegal. Period. ANd not now, because they’ve passed away, but decades ago.
Warners puts up the money and takes the financial risks for these movies, cartoons, etc. They should make most of the profit. But certainly those that created the work should make a tiny slice of the pie. Glad to see it happen.
(Now if the poor guys who wrote Lion King can get their small share I’d be even more happy.)
Mike, in a just world, contracts between consenting parties would be honored, and the government’s only role would be to enforce them.
By the way, Nelson hated having to strip the Siegel/Shuster credit balloon from the ’40s Superman reprints, but Donenfeld decreed that their names were never to be so much as mentioned in any NPP mag, so that was that until Kinney bought DC.
Nelson was as thoughtful and considerate as Weisinger wasn’t.
I loved Superman Returns, too, so there’s a least a couple of people out there. (Bear in mind, too, that it made the studios a profit and a majority of critics gave it a favorable – often a highly favorable – review. On top of that, a sequel “had” been greenlit before all this news came down. In other words, the “conventional wisdom” I tend to see on blogs that SR “stunk” means about as much as the grumps out there who hated Titanic … like me. I hated, hated, hated Titanic. In my circle, I’m in the majority. By any other standard, though, not so much.)
Anything that prevents Bryan Singer from making another Superman movie is good news to me. Bring back Donner!
Contrary to an earlier post, a Superman Returns sequel had NOT been “greenlit”, it was merely “in development” — and in fact the studio had *already* been considering not doing one at all (or perhaps rebooting with another creative team and cast). Most critics gave glowing reviews to Superman Returns on its release because of their generational attachment to Donner’s original film(s). Yes, audiences went, to a point, but didn’t come back in any great numbers, and the film has (had) a lot or problems which impeded its attempted start at a “franchise.” Where do you go with a story that gives Superman no one to love, a son he can’t legally or publicly acknowledge, and an obscenely magnified “messiah” status which the mass public either worships or reviles in equal measure? Singer will not be directing a sequel — bet on it. Time to give the film franchise to the Smallville producers, who deserved their chance at it in the first place. That show has survived ups and downs for seven (going on eight) years — the longest any Superman show has run — *somebody* must like it…
This is only the begining.There are dozens of other cartoonists who were screwed both financially and artistically by the big comics companies… and once the big time lawyers see that it IS possible to win one of these cases, it’ll start a stampede. If there are enough successful cases, you may even see some of the “settled” cases- those that the corporations THOUGHT they had covered their asses on- get challenged.(Warners had an “air-tight” deal with Bob Kane over BATMAN… too bad for them there’s a ton of evidence pointing to Bill Finger as the character’s “real” creator…)
Great news!
i’m so glad to see the creators families get compensated.
I’m still not sure what to think of this. Superman has enough hurdles to get made in the first place, not the least of which is budgetary concerns. His powers pretty much demand a big budget. Now, this will represent another budgetary factor to be taken into consideration before any further movies or television shows are created. And it’s just money that goes right out the door to the families with absolutely no return to the product itself. It’s this wierd arbitrary cost inflater.
It’s not that I don’t think they should be compensated, I get that. I do. But I obviously have concerns about what this means for the future of the character in MANY mediums.
Wonderful blog post.