The final calendar for the Superman case has been set.
The judge has divided the remaining issues into two separate trials. Because of the specific legal questions involved, neither will be a jury trial. Instead, the judge will issue the final determinations on his own.
On Jan. 12, 2009, the issue at stake will be the Siegels’ claim that DC Comics, Warner Bros., Time Warner and other companies connected to the Superman properties are alter egos. That is, the Siegels are arguing that these companies are so intertwined that they are essentially one and the same. The primary reason a plaintiff files an alter-ego claim is to reach the assets of separate entities that would otherwise not be required to pay. For example, if DC could not pay the full amount of its debt and the court deemed Warner Bros. and Time Warner to be its alter egos, the Siegels could collect the remaining amount from those other companies.
As for any amounts the Siegels may be owed from exploitation of the material in Action Comics #1, the date set for trial in regard to accounting of profits is March 24, 2009.
Of course, the dispute between the Siegels and DC (et al.) is not necessarily over even after the court issues its decisions, as an appeal is a distinct possibility. In addition, the court might also schedule a trial for any remaining issues in the Superboy case.
November 5th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
When you take the glasses off and lick the hair to create a spitcurl, Warner Bros. becomes DC Comics.
November 5th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
…Bah. If the choice is the Siegel Heirs getting tons of bucks and no Superboy, then the Heirs can go split.
November 5th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
The hair actually has to be parted the other way, then apply the spit curl.
November 5th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Is anyone else sick to death of hearing about this stupid case?
Ugh.
November 5th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
FFS. It’s been nearly 80 years, the creators are dead, they get plenty of credit, everyone knows they created the characters. DC has been responsible for keeping Superman alive for all that time, the heirs are just trying a cash-grab, it’s time for them to stop these constant lawsuits and get over it.
November 5th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
No, Zawisza. If you part it the other way, then he looks like Time Warn… wait a sec! Holy crap!
November 5th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Good for the Siegels! No one deserves the profits more than the family… NOBODY.
November 6th, 2008 at 2:41 am
Actually, DC Comics whips off its glasses, adds a spit curl, and becomes Warner Bros. Studios. Red Kryptonite morphs WBS into Time Warner. The Siegel family represents the color of magic — that is, green (kryptonite).
November 6th, 2008 at 6:58 am
While I agree that the Siegel and Shuster families deserve their share of the pie, I also believe that they should be happy of the impact that Superman has had on the entire world. My great, great, great, great grand-pappy Washington Irving wrote the Headless Horseman, Rip Van Winkle and many other American Classics, yet you don’t see me trying to sue every publishing company who mentions them or takes their own take on the stories; I’m just glad that he had that kind of impact on the world of literature.
November 6th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Well, there is that little issue of Washington Irving’s works being in the public domain …
November 6th, 2008 at 9:19 am
AT THE RATES THAT THE LAWSUIT IS GOING,THE COPYRIGHT HEARING WILL BE FOR NOTHING BECAUSE BOTH SUPERBOY AND SUPERMAN COPYRIGHT WILL BECOME PUBLIC DOMAIN. I AM PRAYING THAT 2009 WILL SEE THE PROBLEM WILL SOLVED ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. I GOT A FEELING THAT TIME WARNER WILL JUST CHANGE THE NAME OF KAL-EL ALTER-EGO TO SOME ANOTHER NEW ACTION HEROES NAME. GOOD LUCK TO THE FUTURE
November 6th, 2008 at 9:38 am
The creators of Superman knew they were signing away the rights back then. This retro-active who owns what kind of lawsuit is silly. The family has NO RIGHTS to the characters that their relatives signed away in 1938. Consider it lessons learned the hard way.
November 6th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
The sadness of all this, is that the family want MONEY… 70 years before, just in time. Siegel and Shuster (God bless both)knows the industry of his time and knows what happen with all that created to the publisher. I supose what wanna the Siegels, but… what want all the creators who development the character in 70 years?
November 6th, 2008 at 8:15 pm
This lawsuit, as I see it, is entirely frivilous. Great. They created Superman. Then they SOLD the rights to it. That was a gamble, but just because it has made alot of money they want the rights back? Would they be suing if Superman didn’t make any money? Doubtful. Without DC and the various writers over the course of time Superman would still be a mystery man who could jump a long distance.
November 6th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
“Acrid Gunsmoke Says:
Is anyone else sick to death of hearing about this stupid case? Ugh.”
I’m sure that if you’re family was morally entitled to millions of dollars of money that DC/Warner had raped your father for, you’d be more sympathetic.
But, from the sounds of it, you’re only concerned your own enjoyment, and your own needs.
What exactly did you learn from those thousands of superhero comics you’ve read? Apparently nothing.
November 7th, 2008 at 8:44 am
The creators weren’t blind sided when they originally made the deal with DC, they were after making a profit. They did, now it’s the consumers (us) who are gonna take a hit from them denying us a great character all so relatives can claim “artistic/creative rights” (more money)
What is wrong with just accepting that a bad deal was made by your relatives, 70 years ago, and living with it.
November 9th, 2008 at 12:32 am
Wonder how much the ambulance chaser would net from a new ruling money wise from the Siegel heirs – 50% pf their cut?
December 1st, 2008 at 9:19 pm
MOST OF YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT.
First of all, it constantly amazes me that so-called “fans” are inevitably company men to the bitter @#$%ing end. In any legal dispute about the rights to a character or a story, it seems, the “fans” will vigorously defend the comicbook company — no matter how clearly in the wrong they are.
A few of the basic reasons you’re wrong in your uninformed opinions:
* They created “Superman”. Then they SOLD the rights to it.
Wrong. They sold some rights to it. Exactly which rights still remain — 70 years and multiple lawsuits later — a bit unclear. As the original copyright owners, Siegel & Shuster did not necessarily give up all claim to their work by accepting money for it. Authors accept money from book publishers and magazines all the time without giving up their copyright on their work. There has to be a contract spelling out what rights got sold, and if the purchaser doesn’t live up to their end of the agreement, the copyright-holder can seek to terminate the contract. Almost since the beginning, Siegel complained that National Periodicals (aka DC) made promises and assertions that they never lived up to.
* “The creators weren’t blind sided when they originally made the deal with DC, they were after making a profit.”
That’s hardly all they were after. From the beginning, Siegel wanted (and claims he was promised) creative involvement and control. That was his constant and impassioned claim during several legal battles throughout the years.
* The family has NO RIGHTS to the characters that their relatives signed away in 1938. Consider it lessons learned the hard way.
Wrong. First of all, it’s far from clear that Siegel & Shuster signed away all rights. Secondly, Congress rewrote copyright laws in the ’70s, partly to allow creators to redress unfair and predatory practices that had been exercised in the past. One of the provisions allowed creators to act to terminate certain kinds of transfers of copyright — and that’s what this case is all about. In pursuing this matter, the family is undoubtedly within its rights.
* “The sadness of all this, is that the family want MONEY…”
If you’d read anything about the emotional reaction of Siegel’s widow and daughter regarding the ruling, you’d realize that this was as much about vindicating Jerry as anything else.
Get some more actual information before randomly shooting your mouth off about what you think happened in this case.
July 24th, 2011 at 7:10 pm
I must get across my appreciation for your kindness supporting people that should have assistance with this one matter. Your special commitment to passing the message all around was astonishingly insightful and has specifically made some individuals much like me to attain their goals. Your valuable publication entails a whole lot to me and somewhat more to my peers. With thanks; from each one of us.