Superman Lawsuit Restarts

[Admiral_Young]

I thought this had been resolved...

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/blo...ositions-46688

[Ar-Pharazon]

And yet it starts back up every time they plan another movie.

[Admiral_Young]

Well one of the things about the lawsuit is that the rights reverted back before 2012 so Warner Bros had to move their arses if they wanted to produce another movie. I think this is one of the reasons why the Nolan/Synder film has started up.

[Captain Craig]

I'm so sick of this bullshit.
Those damn heirs have been paid 2-3 times now for different things. I mean my god how many different ways can a judge look at this before even the courts say ENOUGH.

I get it, the creators got what we see as pennies now but at the time it was very fair and standard practice. Warners paid them in the what, 60s and then 70's, with some very real money(again for the time).

I see no reason these heirs deserve any more money. PERIOD.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

This is about Warners suing the lawyer for the Siegels for alleged misconduct, not about the rights to Superman as such.

[Hound of UIster]

Captain Craig wrote:

---

I get it, the creators got what we see as pennies now

That a lie created by the heirs of Siegel and Shuster. The two were actually doing very well making at least close to thirty thousand per year from their work, which is close to half a million in our time.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Really? It isn't just the heirs who've complained about this; the creators did during their lifetimes. WB had to be publicly shamed into giving them pensions.

The heirs should take WB for every penny they're legally entitled to, IMAO. No sympathy for the corporation here.

Oh, and what they're "legally entitled to" is what we have courts to determine. Anyone who announces on a BBS that they know "what the law is" and what's "fair" is just blowing smoke.

[Captain Craig]

Even better. Being shamed or otherwise that while they the creators were alive got a pension from WB. THEY'VE BEEN PAID.

FUCK THE GREEDY HEIRS and their third, fourth lawsuits.

Not like the courts haven't made mistakes and misjudgements.

Your anti-big business fine, doesn't mean the families haven't been given $$$$$ then and in other lawsuits. How many lawsuits can actually be legally filed over and over and over one one property? Past that point for my patience.

[Nowhere Man]

I thought this was over the rights to the origin or something. If that is the case then Superman can be told without the origin. There's no need to rush the movie. I want to see this movie really bad, but I don't want to see it rushed and quality diminished.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Captain Craig wrote:

---

Your [sic] anti-big business fine,

Don't make assumptions like that one about what you don't know and you won't be embarrassed.

That, in a nutshell, is what the vituperation against the plantiffs is about in this case anyway.

There are just an awful lot of folks who react to potential interference with the delivery of pop culture product as if someone's threatening to cut off their air. One studio challenges another's ownership of a property; creators wanna get paid; a previously-beloved actor holds out over a contract issue and threatens delay of production on a movie or TV series - the reaction is always the same: damn them for throwing a little sand in the gears of the Machine that manufactures the drug.

[Captain Craig]

Not embarrassed. I'm not the one coming off as an ass putting [sic] out there like a grammar nazi.
Thanks for being concerned.

I'm not worried about Superman going away, he's not even in my top 10.
It's that this is the third or fourth lawsuit on Supes. A very bad precedent is being set. I don't want to be seeing this crap with other characters in the decades to come by other heirs claiming a sob story.

[Timby]

Captain Craig wrote:

---

It's that this is the third or fourth lawsuit on Supes. A very bad precedent is being set. I don't want to be seeing this crap with other characters in the decades to come by other heirs claiming a sob story.

Do you even understand what the estates have sued for?

The litigation between WB / DC Comics and the estates of Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegel is with regard to the termination of copyright filed by them about a decade ago. If the court rules that the termination was valid (and copyright termination is a perfectly legal action under to the Copyright Act), and that the termination extends to derivative works, such as film, animation, etc., then Warner Bros. and DC would lose all rights to Superman and have to write an enormous check to the families for past-due royalties dating back to 1999 (when the termination was filed). It's not "another lawsuit," it's the same thing that's been going on for ages.

The other half of the coin is a lawsuit filed by Warner Bros. against their attorney, while claiming that he has a personal interest in his clients' victory. The attorney has counter-sued under California's anti-SLAPP statute. If he proves that the Warner lawsuit arises out of activities that fall under anti-SLAPP protection (essentially, that it's a malicious lawsuit), which is a pretty low burden of proof, then Warner Bros. will have to show that there is a reasonable probability that it will win on the merits of the overall case -- essentially meaning that the studio would have to put its entire Superman case on display, and then allow the opposition to respond. The judge could then throw WB's entire case out right then and there.

It's a bit more complicated than RARGH GREEDY HEIRS RARGH.

[Hound of UIster]

What National did was peanuts compared to the fraud that Stan Lee pulled on Kirby and Ditko, conning them out of possibly millions or billions worth of art and intellectual property and actual creators credit.

Jack Kirby is current dead, Ditko is so poor that has been reduced to using the original pages of his comics to line his windows and Stan Lee is living the high life. But since Stan is "the Man", nobody is going to speak out for Kirby and Ditko.

[timelord1010]

Captain Craig wrote:

---

Not embarrassed. I'm not the one coming off as an ass putting [sic] out there like a grammar nazi.
Thanks for being concerned.

I'm not worried about Superman going away, he's not even in my top 10.
It's that this is the third or fourth lawsuit on Supes. A very bad precedent is being set. I don't want to be seeing this crap with other characters in the decades to come by other heirs claiming a sob story.

I agree 100%. There has to come a time when a dollar amount is set and then the heirs have no further claims against the company. At the rate things are going Superman will be in the public domain before all of this court stuff is over.

[bigdaddy]

Hopefully this really leads to the death of superman forever.