Seigels half-owners of Superman, says Judge.

[Ice]

As reported on Comic Book Resources:

JUDGE SAYS SIEGELS NOW OWN HALF OF SUPERMAN​

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).




Click the link to read the rest.

 

[Victor Von Doom]

Cha-ching!

 

[Ice]

Read the last paragraph!!


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.



If and when this happens, with Superman going into the Public Domain, Mark Millar will be so fast in snatching him up to do the story he wants to do with Hitch (if it doesn't happen before then) that I'm sure he'd have a heart attack of overjoy!

 

[E]

Wow.

I expect this to be appealed, but that is huge. VERY huge.

 

[DIrishB]

Cha-ching!

Seriously.

Good for them.

 

[ourchair]

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).

I approve of getting the Siegels the money that they and their father deserved.

However, I remain fundamentally opposed to the 1976 Copyright Act Revision. It is a greedy, short-sighted piece of legislation that never should have happened.

 

[Joe Kalicki]

The Siegel's should get some cash, but DC should own the copyright to Superman all by themselves. It never really should've come down to this, and if DC had done the right thing all along it probably never would've.

Besides, as long as Disney is around, there's no way Superman will ever be in the public domain.

 

[Dancanread]

So, does this mean DC could lose the ability to publish new Superman stories in 5 years?

 

[Joe Kalicki]

So, does this mean DC could lose the ability to publish new Superman stories in 5 years?

No, at the most it just means they'll have to pay the Siegels a lot more for him. I imagine it would be more like a Vertigo-type creator-owned deal, where the creators own the property but aren't really allowed to take it to another company if DC stops publishing it.

 

[Random]

Oh man, imagine a world if Superman was a public domain

 

[ourchair]

Seriously though, my concern isn't that 'Superman should be public domain'.

My concern is that American copyright law has ceased to serve its original purposes and become a protectionist legislation.

It has instead been corrupted and I find it ridiculous for people to think that term extensions of copyright law are 'progress.'

 

[Random]

BWHAHAHAHAHA, that made my day.

 

[ourchair]

BWHAHAHAHAgHA, that made my day.

The 'evil public domain guy' actually seems to be a caricature of Lawrence Lessig, constitutional scholar, founder of Creative Commons, copyright law critic and one-time character on The West Wing (as played by Christopher Lloyd).

 

[E]

It never really should've come down to this, and if DC had done the right thing all along it probably never would've.

This is so true and important that I'm going to give it a Post of the Day.

So, does this mean DC could lose the ability to publish new Superman stories in 5 years?

No, at the most it just means they'll have to pay the Siegels a lot more for him. I imagine it would be more like a Vertigo-type creator-owned deal, where the creators own the property but aren't really allowed to take it to another company if DC stops publishing it.

I'm not sure follow that. If this holds up, then yes, they absolutely COULD lose the right to publish Superman stories. I'm not saying you're wrong, Joe - just that I don't understand your reasoning. If they lose the rights, they lose the rights. It may be in their best interest to keep Superman with DC, but I don't see why they would be required in any way.

 

[Ice]

I'm not sure follow that. If this holds up, then yes, they absolutely COULD lose the right to publish Superman stories. I'm not saying you're wrong, Joe - just that I don't understand your reasoning. If they lose the rights, they lose the rights. It may be in their best interest to keep Superman with DC, but I don't see why they would be required in any way.

This is exactly it. They would not be required to, but I'm sure "for the right price" they would.

I honestly don't think we'll ever see Superman in the Public Domain ever. If Shuster does terminate, I think DC will make Seigel/Shuster a deal to keep Superman in the DCU.

 

[Foolsfolly]

Is it wrong that I really want to see Public Domain Superman?

I want to see what the internet will do to him. Everyone would get a crack at doing their own Superman stories and publish them...and make money off of it. Webcomics based on Superman! Superman t-shirts sold by you and me.

I look forward to it.

Also, I'm filing for copyright protection for Public Domain Man! With the power to....whatever lame joke and I lack the energy to backspace it.

 

[ourchair]

Is it wrong that I really want to see Public Domain Superman?

I want to see what the internet will do to him. Everyone would get a crack at doing their own Superman stories and publish them...and make money off of it. Webcomics based on Superman! Superman t-shirts sold by you and me.

I look forward to it.

Also, I'm filing for copyright protection for Public Domain Man! With the power to....whatever lame joke and I lack the energy to backspace it.

I support this.

I firmly believe that any superhero created before 1978 should be public domain.

 

[Gothamite]

Read the last paragraph!!


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.



If and when this happens, with Superman going into the Public Domain, Mark Millar will be so fast in snatching him up to do the story he wants to do with Hitch (if it doesn't happen before then) that I'm sure he'd have a heart attack of overjoy!

:shock:

P-p-public domain?!

Suddenly, Electric Superman seems like the coolest thing ever.

Is it wrong that I really want to see Public Domain Superman?

I want to see what the internet will do to him. Everyone would get a crack at doing their own Superman stories and publish them...and make money off of it. Webcomics based on Superman! Superman t-shirts sold by you and me.

I look forward to it.

Also, I'm filing for copyright protection for Public Domain Man! With the power to....whatever lame joke and I lack the energy to backspace it.

Anyone can make their own Superman comics or stories or movies or whatever as it is; it's just that you can't make money off of them. That's fine by me.

I really can't stand the idea of Superman being in public domain. All sorts of stupid new stories will pop up and every measure of indie producer will start making their own Superman universe and plugging it, etc, etc, until the character is so completely diluted by alternate forms that he'll be forgotten, forever.

The concept of Batman entering the public domain makes me want to vomit out all of my organs.

 

[Foolsfolly]

Not true.

Afraid of Anime Superman?

Superman Slashfic coloring books?

Seriously, the internet will love this.

 

[Joe Kalicki]

I'm not sure follow that. If this holds up, then yes, they absolutely COULD lose the right to publish Superman stories. I'm not saying you're wrong, Joe - just that I don't understand your reasoning. If they lose the rights, they lose the rights. It may be in their best interest to keep Superman with DC, but I don't see why they would be required in any way.

But DC wouldn't lose more than half the rights, is what I'm saying. DC and the Siegels would have to work together to get anything published, unless I missed something.