Judge says Siegels now own half of Superman

[ragernok2002]

from comicbookresources.com

In a possibly historic ruling, a federal judge Wednesday determined that the heirs of Superman co-creator, Jerry Siegel, are now the rightful owners of one-half of the copyright of Superman, and have been since 1999. The New York Times reported today that Judge Stephen Larson of the Central District of California had delivered a whopping 72 page ruling on the matter of who owns the copyright of Superman, establishing that "Action Comics" #1, the first appearance of Superman, was not considered to be a product of work-for-hire, making the copyright for that issue (and, naturally, the character of Superman) eligible for termination by Siegel’s heirs. What that means in simpler terms -- the Siegel's now own half of the Superman copyright.

The ruling was based upon changes made in 1976 to the Copyright Act, extending the total length of copyright protection for a character like Superman from 56 years to 75 years since creation. This change also allowed any copyright transfers to be terminated so that the original copyright owner (or his/her heirs) could gain the benefit of those extra 19 years of protection (with the presumption being that it would be unfair to the original copyright owners, as any deals they made before the change in law were based upon the 56 year duration, not 75).

DC has an array of defenses, but their best one was that "Action Comics" #1 was a work-for-hire, which means that DC would be considered the creator of the copyright. Larson ruled against DC on this point, stating that Siegel and Shuster sold their property (and the copyrights therein) to DC for $130, in a standard copyright transfer. It is this transfer that Siegel’s heirs filed for termination, which would have become effective in 1999, which Larson confirmed Wednesday.

There are a number of details still at play here, of course. The most notable right now is that DC will certainly appeal Larson’s decision. The second is that Larson left it open to a jury to determine both how much money Time Warner (owner of DC Comics) owes the Siegels for the usage of Superman since 1999 (note this is only for US rights of Superman, DC still maintains full international rights), and how many rights the Siegels have to characters created after "Action Comics" #1 (as those later issues were work-for-hire, but how many of these characters were derivatives of Superman?).

Finally, the most notable event for future details is that this opens up an extremely interesting situation in 2013. In 2013, Joe Shuster’s estate is eligible to terminate their half of the Superman copyright. You see, Shuster had no heirs, so his estate was unable to terminate those extra 19 years mentioned before, as the changes in 1976 to the Copyright Act were only available to authors or their heirs. In 1998, however, the Copyright Term Extension Act was passed, giving an additional 20 years to all copyrights established before 1978. Unlike the previous Copyright Act extension, the Act passed in 1998 gives the estate of Authors the right to terminate, as well. Therefore, in 2013, Shuster’s estate (represented by Shuster's nephew Mark Peary) will terminate just like Siegel’s heirs, meaning DC might very well lose the copyright to Superman entirely until 2033, at which point Superman would enter the public domain. Of course, who knows whether Congress will pass another extension before then.

siegels own half of superman

[Dread]

Whoa!

[Guest]

Um.. that's... interesting.

[Dread]

Can anyone else wait for Thor to kill Superman in the Marvel U when he's public domain?

Don't get me wrong. Superman will never be in the public domain. They won't let it happen.

[Dan]

Don't get me wrong. Superman will never be in the public domain. They won't let it happen.

Oh, hell no. If you thought Disney fought hard to keep Mickey out, there's no WAY Warner Brothers would let Superman get even close.

Still, good for the Siegels.

[Delete]

The Siegels now own Superman's origin.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/supermannews.php?id=8614

[Stavros]

So they just start using Superboy again and now they are losing Superman?

DC cannot catch a break.

[illogicology]

I hate that companies are allowed to hold property back from entering public domain, it's really another exploitation of what copyright laws are all about. I also think it's unfair to the copyright owners who don't fit into the incredibly rich category and can't play the same game.

[Stavros]

I have no issues with DC owning Superman forever because quite frankly it was them to elevated Superman to what he is, not the original creators. Its like a birth mother trying to take credit for the achievements of a child raised their entire life by foster parents. My views might not hold up as law but for crying out loud, its not like DC never gave those guys anything, time and again they've paid them off and every time it just wind up postponing the damn lawsuit.

[KnightWing]

CRAP.

CRAP CRAP CRAP.

>_<

[SuaveStar]

So Geoff Johns secret origin is going out the window?

Also, what about New Krypton?

This is all going to get really fucking messy isn't it.

[Stavros]

So Geoff Johns secret origin is going out the window?

Also, what about New Krypton?

This is all going to get really fucking messy isn't it.

I doubt they'll stop making all Superman comics, it hardly seems worth doing what with all the books he's already been in since the copyright reverted. Remember, that's not just Superman books, its Justice League, Trinity and anything else he might have popped up in.

Funny thing is that DC can still use Supergirl with impunity whatever they do, she's an in-house creation.

[SuaveStar]

So Geoff Johns secret origin is going out the window?

Also, what about New Krypton?

This is all going to get really fucking messy isn't it.

I doubt they'll stop making all Superman comics, it hardly seems worth doing what with all the books he's already been in since the copyright reverted. Remember, that's not just Superman books, its Justice League, Trinity and anything else he might have popped up in.

Funny thing is that DC can still use Supergirl with impunity whatever they do, she's an in-house creation.

Oh yeah, I know they won't stop doing it, but all this storylines now look to be part of the Siegel propertys.

Also, Action Comics is close to 900 issues.

It is greedy that the guy got paid handsomely for the idea and repeatedly got paid, only for the family to just keep pushing their luck, and always winning.

But Krypton has such prominence right now, I wonder if DC will Superboy that all.

[KnightWing]

Hmm. Well, if DC owns the other half of the Superman rights, does that mean that they can keep publishing Superman comics?

[SuaveStar]

Yeah, I don't think anything would stop them publishing Superman comics.

Stavros has it right about the whole adopting a child analogy.

[Dread]

It's payola people.

The Siegels, I'm sure, wouldn't want their father's only piece of legacy worth a damn to disappear? Not a chance.

But remember, this counts for copyright usage, including a fair sum deemed by a judge for the cost of optioning a Superman movie.

[JackFetch]

I think this pretty much kills any Superman movie in the near future. WB will look at how much the last one made, minus half for the Siegels, and realize it's not worth making.

[Dread]

I was more talking about backpay for Superman Returns but I agree with you as well.

[illogicology]

I suppose we might see the character return to the kind of movie arrangements for the first films with the property licensed out.

[SuaveStar]

I was more talking about backpay for Superman Returns

Well, looks like the Siegels will enjoy that $5.

Also, I don't think it's as much about the legacy as it is about owning back royalties on the most popular Superhero ever.

Everyone whos ever read a Superman comic or seen a TV show/film with Superman sees the sign that says: Created by, only two other Dc creators get the credit that I know of, Bob "We'll just put my name, it's simpler that way..." and the guy who created Wonder Woman.