The long ongoing copyright case over who owns the rights to Superman just got very personal. Attorneys for Warner Bros (which owns DC Comics) late Wednesday night claimed Superman heirs attorney Marc Toberoff has “systematically suppressed relevant evidence” and filed a motion (read it here) against the lawyer and the estates of the superhero’s co-creators. The filing seeks terminating sanctions and an evidentiary hearing for November 12. But this morning, Deadline was given a letter (original here) in response from Laura Siegel Larson — the daughter of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel and Joanne Siegel, who served as the original model for Lois Lane. Larson, herself a retired award-winning journalist now suffering from multiple sclerosis, says she will never give up “fighting for what’s right”. She charges that Warner Bros has spent $35 million on corporate attorneys who now include Daniel Petrocelli, Matthew Kline and Cassandra Seto of O’Melveny & Myers. Here it is edited (and follows one written by her late mother directly to Time Warner chief Jeff Bewkes):
October 11, 2012
Dear Superman Fans Everywhere,
My father, Jerry Siegel, co-created Superman as the “champion of the oppressed … sworn to devote his existence to helping those in need!” But sadly his dying wish, for his family to regain his rightful share of Superman, has become a cautionary tale for writers and artists everywhere.
My family’s David and Goliath struggle against Warner Bros, the media conglomerate, goes back to April 1997, when my mom and I exercised our clear right under the Copyright Act to achieve my dad’s dream of recovering his copyrights. In April 1999, my dad’s half of the original Superman rights reverted to us, entitling our family to a significant share of Superman profits, which Warner/DC Comics refused to pay. For over thirteen years they have fought us at every turn, in and out of court, aiming to make recovery of the money they owe us so impossibly difficult that we would give up and settle for peanuts.
We refused to be intimidated despite my elderly mom’s heart condition and my multiple sclerosis. In 2008 the U.S. District Court ruled that my mom and I had successfully recaptured my father’s Superman copyrights and were entitled to Superman profits since April 1999.
Angered and alarmed by this defeat, Warner Bros resorted to a despicable old trick: diverting attention from the legal merits of our case by personally attacking our long-time lawyer, Marc Toberoff. Through DC, the media giant filed a lawsuit against Mr. Toberoff, my family and the Estate of Superman’s co-creator Joe Shuster, falsely claiming “unfair competition” and that Toberoff interfered with an out of court offer that Warner tried to push on my mom and me in early 2002 – an offer full of studio accounting traps that we refused to sign before we even knew Mr. Toberoff.
Warner Bros possesses documents stolen from my attorney’s office which mysteriously ended up on the desks of three top Warner executives. Warner claims it has no evidence whatsoever as to when these large packages arrived. According to Warner, the thief also included a cowardly anonymous letter that vilifies our attorney and mischaracterizes the privileged attorney-client communications enclosed. In a disgraceful violation of my privacy, Warner’s lawyers attached this nasty anonymous letter to a publicly filed complaint and leaked it to the media.
In the midst of this sideshow, my mom, the original model for Lois Lane, passed away last year at 93, still determined to keep her promise to my dad. She never got to relax and enjoy any proceeds from the crusade she fought until her dying day.Now the torch is in my hands and I won’t be silent any longer about Warner Bros’ tactics. I refuse to be bullied or deterred from enforcing my farnily’s rights, and fully support my attorney who has tirelessly defended them. Warner Bros’ smear campaign has only made me more determined than ever. We have the right to the attorney of our choice, which is none of Warner’s business…
What Warner Bros apparently doesn’t realize is that despite their tremendous power, I will NEVER give up on my parents’ dream of rightfully restoring my father’s rights to his family.
Would Superman, the embodiment of “truth, justice and the American way,” let Warner Bros, DC Comics, and their gang of attorneys get away with this? Not for an instant!
Laura Siegel Larson
Los Angeles, California
Related: Court Hands Warner Bros A Victory In Superman Copyright Case
Related: WB Vendetta Against Superman Copyright Lawyer
Related: Warner Bros/DC Comics Sues Superman Copyright Lawyer
Meanwhile, Warner Bros’ 32-page motion accuses Toberoff and the Siegel and Shuster heirs: “
Defendants refused to disclose the existence or nature of key evidence; submitted false and misleading privilege logs to mask or conceal non-privileged documents; and made affirmative misrepresentations — including under oath — about the existence, location, and provenance of evidence.” In 2004, Toberoff representing the heirs of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel sued DC Comics and Warner Bros over the rights to the man from Krypton. In May 2010, the studio sued Toberoff directly. Wednesday’s motion, which is part of that 2010 suit, claims “Toberoff acted predominantly as a businessman and entrepreneur, while invoking his status as a lawyer purposefully to shield relevant evidence.” In April, the Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit rejected Toberoff’s move to use attorney-client privilege to keep documents pertinent to the copyright case secret. WB/DC claim that material revealed from that ruling include letters from the Siegels’ previous lawyer asserting that there was deal between the heirs and the studios, as well 2003 correspondence between the heirs, talking about Toberoff’s “bogus” promise of a billionaire who wanted to invest $15 million in the Superman copyright.



Another example of business in action. Didn’t WB just become the 1st media company ever to pass $1Billion in 1 year?
Ouch. WB should run, not walk, to the settlement table. This letter and the details and conviction behind it make them look like awful, vindictive bullies. Good for her for sticking to her guns and backing her attorney.
This just points out once again the vile nature of the men who run Hollywood studios. It’s too bad she doesn’t mention the names of the tops execs who are behind this. Since the national media is owned by Warner Bros. and people like them it is unlikely this story will get coverage.
Typical storm trooper tactics to crush the little guy with legalities and litigation. Greed has superceded creative rights and the only ones who really make out on this are the attorneys and WB. And now it looks like they’ll just wait it out until the poor heir dies of MS. Just give them the money and move on.
Public companies have to answer to boards and shareholders. They are the ones to be even more angry.
As moving as her letter is, I personally will not automatically believe either side in this case without a much more thorough understanding of the specifics.
How are the Siegel heirs different from any writer heirs? WB would defend against any heirs same way, no?
If WB pays Superman, then WB would have to pay for dozens of characters, heirs, all seeking profits and co-control on their terms. If superman then Bugs Bunny too, right? Makes sense to defend.
It boils down to Superman NOT being “work for hire”. Superman was a fully realized concept, along with several weeks of Daily Newspaper strips – Later recut and pasted as the story in Action #1. That allowed the heirs to reclaim their rights.
The bulk of properties owned by DC and Warners WERE and ARE “work for Hire”, and parties involved with creation of these have no rights.
The problem is that even though a “full formed Idea”, Superman was sold Lock Stock and red Underpants to DC when they Hired Siegel and Schuster…
so clearly sold was Superman, that S&S were only re-granted their Creator Credit in 1978 when Richard Donner (director of Superman: The Movie) asked WB to do so as it was the 40th Anniversary
It’d kind of be like Grandpa selling a Classic car, then getting to drive it in a Parade, and willing it to his kids, despite the Title still being in someone else’s name
Go get ‘em Laura they are evil people worse than Lex Luthor. Superman would have a lot of fun if he were real he’d zoom into Warner Bros. and smash the bad guys the way they deserve to be pulverized along with their lawyers. $35 million in legal fees that should have been paid to your family and to the Shusters. Despicable and disgraceful is what they are. Keep fighting the good fight you have everyone’s full support.
I’m having a difficult time getting behind Laura’s side of this issue. Whenever I try to dig into the heart of the argument between DC and the Siegel estate, I find myself staring at an idea that I disagree with. I have not been convinced that any of Jerry Siegel’s heirs are entitled to any of the money that has been generated by the Superman property, as they have in no way directly contributed to the work that was required to turn the idea of the Superman character into something that is able to generate money. I can definitely get behind the idea that Jerry Siegel himself was not properly compensated for the role he played, but I feel that the moral obligation ends with him. I can sympathize to a degree that it was his wish to give the money he felt he was owed to his family and therefore they are just carrying on with what he would have done, but I feel that idea is overshadowed by the lack of a direct contribution to tangible work on the part of the Siegel heirs. It’s easy to put ourselves in the shoes of the individual who feels that she’s been wronged by a giant, faceless corporation, but try to put yourself in the shoes of Warner Bros (or more specifically, DC Comics, which is now controlled by Warner Bros). How do you think you’d react if you were a part of an organization that has spent 70+ years working to build and promote the Superman character? That’s 70+ years of employees developing stories, making movies, designing action figures, printing t-shirts, and doing all of the other countless number of activities that are required to turn a piece of intellectual property into tangible products. If I were in their shoes, I imagine I’d also fight tooth and nail against anyone who makes claims that she is entitled to a percentage of money for work that she has not contributed to. I guess when it comes down to it, I just don’t like the idea of people feeling that they are entitled to the benefits of work performed by other people.
I personally know Laura Siegel Larson and had the good fortune to work with her in the journalism world. She is one of the hardest working, most responsible, and truly honorable people out there, and not to be underestimated. True to her roots, she is brilliant and talented. I’ve seen her perform miracles under crazy pressure. What happened to their family’s creative rights is indeed a travesty of justice and a cautionary tale for writers and artists everywhere. I hope that both sides can finally reach a settlement on the copyright issue that helps undo past wrongs, recognizes that it all started with Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, but at the same time continues to fuel the franchise of one of the most original and enduring characters of all time.
The only way I see the Heirs having a case is if they could prove that Siegel and Schuster were some how cheated, underpaid, or otherwise violated and that WB should not escape ‘Punishment’ for that violation simply because S&S have now passed away…
however the Estates/heirs seem to be making this about what is Owed to THEM.. Not what WAS OWED to Jerry and Joel. or as the ‘model’ for Lois what may have been owed to Mrs. Siegel (although even from my limited copies of Comics, the Lois Lane character model has changed drastically and Often from the one used in the original strips