Variety has an interesting article about the case of Siegel heirs vs. DC/Warner Bros over the rights to Superman. Here are a few excerpts from the article…

The judge, who conducted a 10-day bench trial, also noted that Warner Bros. chairman Alan Horn had testified that he hopes to make another “Superman” movie but added that the property wasn’t under development at the studio, that no script had been written and that the earliest another “Superman” pic could be released would be in 2012.

In making his decision, Larson looked at other licensing deals for properties such as Iron Man, X-Men and Spider-Man. Attorney Marc Toberoff, who represents heirs Joanne Siegel and Laura Siegel Larson, told Daily Variety that the judge had erred in not considering comparable licensing deals for bestselling novels penned by Tom Clancy and Michael Crichton and popular musicals such as “My Fair Lady.”
More than one option

Toberoff, who has specialized in copyright claims, admitted that proving a sweetheart deal within a vertically integrated conglom was a challenge. “This was always going to be tough to prove,” he added.

Toberoff also asserted in a written statement that the Siegel heirs and the heirs of co-creator Joe Shuster will own the entire Superman copyright in 2013.

“This trial was only an interim step in the multifaceted accounting case which remains, in that it only concerned the secondary issue of whether DC Comics, or DC Comics and Warner Bros., would have to account to the Siegels,” he said. “To put this in further perspective, the entire accounting action pales in comparison to the fact that in 2013, the Siegels, along with the estate of Joe Shuster, will own the entire original copyright to Superman, and neither DC Comics nor Warner Bros. will be able to exploit any new Superman works without a license from the Siegels and Shusters.”

So what does all this mean? Sounds to me like Superman will be a “Free Agent” in 2013 and that isn’t good for DC Comics!

Popularity: 2% [?]