Siegel heirs could jeopardize Superman Reboot

Fight over rights man ground "Man of Steel"

News
By LP4 - Aug 19, 2010 01:08 PM EST
Filed Under: Man of Steel

I was going around the internet just a little while ago. There's been an update on the Siegel lawsuit over the rights to Superman. At the end of the article it said that the lawsuit COULD potentially endanger Nolan's Superman reboot.

I sure hope the Siegels won't mess up the new film. They could very well screw over an entire loyal fanbase. I hope something can get settled so we can still get our badass reboot film that we were promised.

Here's the link: http://movies.ign.com/articles/111/1112807p1.html

I just wanna know what everyone's thoughts are on this.

MAN OF STEEL & DEADPOOL AND WOLVERINE Star Henry Cavill Joins The Cast Of Live-Action VOLTRON Movie
Related:

MAN OF STEEL & DEADPOOL AND WOLVERINE Star Henry Cavill Joins The Cast Of Live-Action VOLTRON Movie
Zack Snyder Shares Never-Before-Seen Photo Of Henry Cavill As Clark Kent In MAN OF STEEL
Recommended For You:

Zack Snyder Shares Never-Before-Seen Photo Of Henry Cavill As Clark Kent In MAN OF STEEL

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

Do you have what it takes to write for us?
Want to contribute?
LEEE777
LEEE777 - 8/19/2010, 1:15 PM
How about actually going to the link and putting in your own words what its all about right here lol?

: P

Lets hope SUPERMAN's beyond epic!
Denn1s
Denn1s - 8/19/2010, 1:15 PM
what a bunch of ungrateful assholes. isn't it enough that your name is forever linked with the biggest superhero of all time?
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 1:18 PM
@LEEE777- I put it here on CBM, to rally more fellow comic-fans to make their voices heard. I for one am against the lawsuit. Siegel and Shuster are gone now...and they have their names forever inked on EVERYTHING that is Superman. Whatever bad blood they once had, is now past. The heirs just seem a tad bit greedy. And they don't care who they screw over to get what they didn't even create technically- their father/husband created the character.

@Denn1s- I agree with you brotha- %100
SuperSpidey
SuperSpidey - 8/19/2010, 1:19 PM
i'm pretty sure your supposed write up the article in your own words and post it but anyway...

the hell, are they so greedy they have to screw over a potentially good movie and piss of thousands of fans?
SuperSpidey
SuperSpidey - 8/19/2010, 1:25 PM
oh ok LP4 i see,my bad.

it just seems like a superman film is too much to ask now..we had 2 that were good, 2 that were god awful and one that was mediocre..i guess one that rocks is really asking too much...in bizarro world, c'mon WB you have money,use it.
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 1:30 PM
@SuperSpidey- Yeah I don't understand the greed of those heirs...I mean they are already getting money from all Superman related profits. We the fans just want at least ONE LAST EPIC Superman film. And if the Siegels [frick] it up, then that's messed up of them.
jazzman
jazzman - 8/19/2010, 1:32 PM
some of you guys forget the actually creator tried to sue DC before of ownership/copyright of Superman. this is nothing new really it has been a on going battle for years.
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 1:34 PM
@jazzman- I know the actual creator tried to sue DC before. But what you don't realize is that apparently the copyright laws have changed since then...making it more plausible for the heirs of the creator to now attain the creation than the actual creator had back in the day. That's what worries me.

The Siegel/Shusters= the END of Superman.
SuperSpidey
SuperSpidey - 8/19/2010, 1:35 PM
@LP4
Tell me about it, i was between apprehensious and overjoyed to get a new nolan produced superman film, but that was mainly cos i though we would be getting a new superman film with at the very least one punch thrown but if this prevents it from being made i think i may just go and watch superman 4 to make myself feel better, i will be that dismayed lol.
WaylonJones
WaylonJones - 8/19/2010, 1:39 PM
Yeah its a bad deal but if you had the chance to have the rights to one of the greatest characters of all time you would try and get it as well. Like I said bad deal but I get it.
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 1:42 PM
@SuperSpidey- Yeah, I think Superman4 was the only film where he actually punched something. Superman Returns= no punch and no action. lol

I don't like the Siegels...they seem to not give a [frick] about the fans. If not for the fans, Superman wouldn't be what he is today- an ICON. We're the ones who bought his merchandise and comics. We're the ones who paid for his films. Without the fans...the Siegels wouldn't really have the character to bitch about. IF the Siegels do indeed take away Superman, I hope they never set foot near ANY comicon events. I doubt any fans will welcome them.
jazzman
jazzman - 8/19/2010, 1:49 PM
@LP4

copyright laws have changed but they still have a case since article reporting it. WB/DC will make a deal with them like they always do. remember the whole Watchmen legal issue with FOX and WB.

@WaylonJones

yeah your right alot of people would do it. also it does not mean they wont work with DC cause most likely the heirs know how important of a character Superman is in the DC universe.
WaylonJones
WaylonJones - 8/19/2010, 1:49 PM
Everything I have read or saw they just want the rights not to take the character away (I have also not seen anything that they are going to keep him out in the open either) I think we are jumping to conclusions here. Once again it is a bad situation but we need to gather facts before we start getting angry. Plus if you read the article be mad at the attorney who is talking them into this not just them.
jazzman
jazzman - 8/19/2010, 1:54 PM
@WaylonJones

so right people assume they taking the character away from DC but they not they just want the rights.
Luigi
Luigi - 8/19/2010, 2:10 PM
I'm suprised Superman isn't iconic enough to be in the public domain already lol.
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 2:12 PM
@WaylonJones- the Siegels are not free of blame. The attorney is an asshole...Marc Taberoff or whatever. But the Siegels are the ones who hired him to begin with. DC and Siegel/Shuster did have bad blood but they have since then, patched up old holes...gave them all the credit they deserved on everything that is Superman and even paid the Siegel heirs a certain percentage for all Superman merchandise...that's money the Siegel's heirs didn't have to actually WORK for...they were just blessed enough to be related to Jerry Siegel and to receive compensation for what he created. They're being greedy though...and I seriously don't like them.
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 2:19 PM
@Luigi- That is one of THE most adorable avatars ever (not to sound weird) haha but yeah, Luigi is just awesome.
gandalf550
gandalf550 - 8/19/2010, 2:23 PM
Here's hoping they come to their senses. If they completely take Superman away from us, they'll never hear the end of it.
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 2:31 PM
I just hope DC can cut a deal with the Siegels...give them more money and just end their constant bitching.
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 2:39 PM
In any case, Nolan is taking sooo damn long with the reboot, ANYTHING could go wrong in the next few months...so I'm not holding out for this movie anymore. It may never actually hit the theaters... -_-

How sad the Supes franchise may end with Superman Returns. Not a good film for Supes go to go off on. I had hoped if he had one last film, it'd be the Nolan reboot. The reboot was announced nearly 6 or more months ago and nothing has really been done with it...no casting...no screenplay. They have a story and that's it. Come on Nolan...pick up the pace already!!!
Protonite
Protonite - 8/19/2010, 2:45 PM
Dear, Siegels. I sympathize with you over the whole ownership ordeal and all. But don't you ever dare jeopardize this potentially-awesome reboot, you hear? NERRRD-RAGEEE!
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 2:59 PM
@Protonite- between you and me...the deadly mixture of: Bryan Singer's dumb vision for Superman, Chris Nolan's slowness at making the damn film and the Siegel's greediness...I figure they'll cancel the [frick]en reboot.
NERO
NERO - 8/19/2010, 3:01 PM
Greedy assholes. Shuster and Siegle made two different agreements with DC in their lifetimes; one for cash and pensions, one for credit as the creators. They were okay with that. The families contributed nothing to the creation of Superman. Why they think they deserve rights to it is beyond me. If this were S&S themselves I would sympathize more, but they took their settlement and were happy with it.

I hate when people say, "Oh, they were screwed." They may have been, but it was because THEY didn't do the due diligence when they signed over the character. Bob Kane was offered a similar deal for Batman, he paid a lawyer $80 to look over the contract, and the lawyer reworked it so that he got a small percentage of the rights and royalties. They handed the amended contract back to DC and the publisher agreed to it with little fuss and Kane was a fairly wealthy guy the rest of his life because of it. Kane later said, "It was the best $80 I ever spent." It is sad that S&S struggled for cash in their later years before DC agreed to give them a life time pension, but all it would have taken was a little effort on their part at the time of signing over the character.

Mistake on their part? Absolutely, but entirely avoidable. Because of that I don't think the family is owed jack-shit.
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 3:07 PM
@NERO- I couldn't agree with you more. And to top it off, I just found out that the Shuster estate are going to sue for the OTHER HALF of the Superman copyright. Superman is being picked apart, piece by piece. So much greed...stupid ASS heirs.
Checkmate
Checkmate - 8/19/2010, 3:19 PM
Bunch'a spoiled brats!
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 3:23 PM
@NegativeMan- Yep...pretty much they are. It's like their motto should be- "we can never have enough"

I'm thinking by 2013- bye bye Superman. -_-
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 3:31 PM
@Sithsidious66- Dear god no. To make Superman fit in their universe, Marvel would probably go the route Stan Lee went when he "reimagined" Superman as being a powerless blond dude, who used some hover pack thing to fly. It was lame.

I rather Superman remain "dead" than be bought by another company that could potentially butcher him even more. DC is the best place for Supes...when I think of the DC Universe, I instantly think of Superman. He IS the DCU.
jazzman
jazzman - 8/19/2010, 3:59 PM
@LP4

now u blaming Nolan, why should Nolan rush a story remember his not directing the movie his just a producer. Nolan just finished Inception now his focusing on Batman 3 and Superman story its alot of work. plus WB/DC are the ones who need to sort out the legal issue.
LP4
LP4 - 8/19/2010, 4:08 PM
@jazzman- I'm not blaming Nolan. But come on, the reboot was announced like 6 or so months ago and there has been ZERO action done with it. No casting...nothing. I mean it's already been nearly half a year since it was announced. Does it take a full [frick]en year just to cast someone as Superman?! That's retarded. Not only that, but they can't even sort out who will direct...they're taking baby-steps with the reboot, to the point where they're moving ridiculously slow with the damn thing. I say- JUST GET A [frick]EN DIRECTOR ALREADY AND MAKE THE DAMN FILM. It shouldn't take half a year just to figure out who will direct it.

Normally I wouldn't care if Nolan takes forever with the film...in fact normally I'd think it's better to take his time to make it a great film. But seeing as how this situation isn't normal...and time IS of the essence in terms of the lawsuit, I just feel Nolan needs to get his ass in gear and start the [frick]en film already. Get a director and start casting auditions. No more stupid rumors...I want REAL progress on the film already. It's been half a year...let's at least get a director and lead actor on board.
RedDevil
RedDevil - 8/19/2010, 4:13 PM
[frick] those greedy douchebags! Superman needs that reboot! Those kids of Joel Siegel just disgraced their father's legacy. I feel sorry for the legendary writer:(
jazzman
jazzman - 8/19/2010, 4:24 PM
@LP4

first of the movie is aiming for 2012 you wont hear any casting until later this year. maybe they got a director but they aint saying yet cause maybe this director still film a movie. if they dont have a director yet they looking for a director whos worth it u cant just say they should hurry up and get a director. if thats the cast might aswell get a rubbish director to do the movie. the film industry is a business most things take time. plus your panicking too much.
HulkPool
HulkPool - 8/19/2010, 4:31 PM
@Chrisdpariot i completely agree with you!
WaylonJones
WaylonJones - 8/20/2010, 5:20 AM
@LP4 I was not saying that they are free of blame. I will state once again IT IS A BAD DEAL, BUT I GET WHY THEY ARE DOING IT. You can not tell me that if you didn't have the chance to make money off of one of the most popular characters of all time that you wouldn't.



I'm not sure why people think that they are going to take Superman away? Untill I see factual proof that they are planning on not doing anything with him I'm not going to get upset about it. I mean they don't make money if he is sitting on the shelf.
LP4
LP4 - 8/20/2010, 1:33 PM
@WaylonJones- How else could they merchandise the character? They are just a small family, they don't have the money to fund him for a big, live-action film. That's what most Supes-fans want, to see our hero on the big screen kicking ass just like all other fans get to see their heroes do. Well, Nolan is about to do that for WB...and if the Siegel family ruins that possibility, I'll be very upset. The reboot is supposed to be like the top billed film of 2012 dammit and I don't want these greedy heirs to ruin it. And if they make a Superman film it'll be lame...it'll be based on the Superman they actually WON, which is the very first original version from 1938...not the Superman, most mainstream audiences know. It'll be the one, that can't fly, is much weaker...and well...just not what I'd want for a Superman film. Trust me, I'm not that young and I've been a Supes-fan my entire life...and I just want an epic Superman film and I feel Nolan is the man to deliver. Not the Siegels though...
WaylonJones
WaylonJones - 8/20/2010, 1:45 PM
@LP4 I did see that they may not get the rights to all his powers (as odd as that sound) because when the character was created with out flight and I think heat vision too I could be wrong on that. I'm am with you all the way about seeing him done right in a movie. I just understand why they are doing it (once again I think it sucks).
LP4
LP4 - 8/20/2010, 10:50 PM
@WaylonJones- I think we both want the same for Supes on the big screen. It's just a pity what is happening with these heirs. Kinda makes me nervous what other heroes may suffer a similar fate as our red/blue boyscout. But thanks for your feedback about this situation. I'll update you and everyone about anything new that comes up, but that is the latest on the lawsuit situation... =(
RyKnow
RyKnow - 8/23/2010, 8:53 AM
Goddammit, the only computer I can get access to the internet on for the time being is at work, and the stupid thing has a firewall that blocks me visiting that link :(

I kind of get the picture judging by the reactions above but I'm still optimistic. I don't know how true this is so please, feel free to correct me; apparently, WB HAVE to have a Superman film out by 2012 or lose the rights altogether. Is that right? If so, the planned release date would mean the film will come out within that time frame meaning we should get that elusive epic we've all been waiting for.
Like I say though, I couldn't read the article and what I have heard/read isn't from the most reliable of sources, so take my comment with a pinch of salt.

@LP4 - I'll be waiting for any updates you might find (with a slight feeling of nervousness).
skullboy
skullboy - 8/24/2010, 12:59 PM
Damn the Siegels. This could cause alotta people to quit comics instantly. Greedy, oportunistic a-holes!
krpman
krpman - 8/27/2010, 11:41 PM
I thought it was ruled that if WB does not begin production on another Superman film by 2012 then the rights would go back to the Siegle/Shuster Estates as far as film rights were concerned, since film rights and book publishing rights are seperate cases. Am I right or did I miss something?

Anyhow, Siegle and Shuster set up these estates for thier families which is cool.

I agree with the estates getting 'royaltees' from DC as per the agreement between the estates and WB/DC ENT. However, my feeling, despite what the law may or may not read, is thay DC should be able to keep the rights to Superman since the rights were sold to them by the creators.

The royaltees were meant as compensation for a bad sale that the creators made, I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

If compensation is renderes I see no reason to be able to sue for the rights, but it seems the estates can and they did.

With that said, even if the film rights reverse, WB can still make another movie if they leess the rights back from the estates.

Moreover I'm sure the estates would also leese publishing rights back to DC, because I do not think the estates want to fork out money to publish the book.
Related Headlines
Latest Headlines

Hot Headlines Hot Headlines

Sci-Fi & Fantasy

Anime & Manga

Gaming

Horror

Cartoons & Animated Features

Action Movies & TV

Pro Wrestling & MMA News
View Recorder