The History of Invulnerability: A New Play About Jerry Siegel & Superman

Thank [frick], no [frick]ing EVANS or REYNOLDS in this!! ; D

Kudos @ ED i'll pop right over!

This story of Siegel and Schuster is an inspirational story. There is a great biography for young kids on their story and how they were nerds who were not part of the crowd. I read it to some classes for a local RIF program here. Its sad that they got suckered into selling the rights for Superman for $130. Quite a shame. :-(

I'm not a huge fan of the Siegels and what they're doing presently (suing DC/WB and trying to take away Superman from the fans)

I'll skip this play.

Ed's absolutely right

As I noted above, the ONLY reason that they got the credit and some benefits is that Superman: The Movie was soon to be released, and Neal Adams among others jumped on board and more or less forced DC/Warners to do something. But the thing to remember is that Siegel and Shuster were already old men at that point, struggling just to stay alive.

Whether or not the estate had anything to do with the creation of Superman is besides the point. When a creator is lucky enough to create something that connects with the public, it's usually not only to benefit his own life but the lives of his family for generations to come. Think about the billions of dollars that have been made by Superman comics, merchandise, movies, TV shows, animation, etc.

Yes, DC took on the comic and, yes, no one argues that Siegel and Shuster signed away their rights, never imaginging back in 1938 that Superman would become what he was destined to become. At the time, no one could have imagined such a creation to become a veritable phenomenon that people would still be talking and thinking about passionately over 70 years later.

Legally, the ball was in DC/Warner's court, but like I said earlier, morally something more should have been done and at an earlier time. That didn't happen, and now the Siegels (and soon the Shusters) are exercising their LEGAL RIGHT to reclaim the copyright.

In the end, the Siegel/Shuster estates and DC/Warners will likely end up working together to create new Superman adventures. It will be to their mutual benefit to do so -- as well as the benefit of the fans. The only difference is that the heirs of the creators of Superman will benefit in a way that Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster were never able to.

meh, I'm not really worried about Superman going anywhere any time soon, and for three good reasons;

1. In 2013 the Siegel/Shuster heirs will regain full ownership of several Superman copyrights, in the United States: The initial Superman concept, characters and concepts as they appeared in Action Comics # 1, and in the first few weeks of the daily newspaper strip from the late 1930s. The court has already ruled that the Siegel's have partial ownership, back-dated to 1999.

2. DC retains copyright ownership in the US of all Superman-related copyrights created after those first few stories, such as the Daily Planet, Kryptonite, Lex Luthor, Jimmy Olsen, Superman's expanded origins, etc.

3. DC owns all international copyrights related to Superman, and all Superman trademarks, such as the logo, the S-shield and the post-WWII costume.

So you see, Superman isn't going anywhere, as both parties need the use of all the related trademarks and copyrights. The Shusters and Siegels can't really take him any where and they know it; what they have is superman in name only. They could only tell stories where superman cannot fly, doesn't have heat vision and has no real villains. What they have is completely unviable on its own...but it robs DC of the planet Krypton, and kryptonite so they would potentially be limited in the kinds of stories they could tell. What will likely happen is a new deal between the heirs and DC, where DC pays the heirs for exclusive use of their copyrights, which is really what they should have done way back when.

His value is exactly why the heirs are making a big deal about the rights. What they have isn't actually worth much, but it is a nuisance to DC, so they're hoping to turn that into money.
The way it was explained to me by my friend, who is a law student, is like this:

Let's say your grandpa is really silly and promises you 99% share of his Toyota Camry and 1% share of his Toyota Camry to your bratty sister - shares in the undivided whole. Undivided whole means you're both entitled to the whole car, but in the proportions dictated. So you can't break off a rearview mirror and give it to your sister and you can't sell the car and give her 1% [WITHOUT her agreement]. That means that 3.65 days out of the year you let her have the car. This is a major hassle. You can't sell the car and you can't move far away from your sister (unless you decide to trek back over to her so she can enforce her 3.65 days).

What do you do in that situation? You go to a court to say this situation is ridiculous and clearly your grandpa never meant to put this burden on you and declare you own the car 100%. This would be worth your while especially if you tried to buy your sister out but because she knew how much of a hassle this was to you, charges 20% of the value of the car rather than 1%. But guess what, if she tried to put in an ad in the paper for 1% of a car... or get a loan based on that, or anything else, NO ONE would buy it. Who wants 1% of a car? I guess only people who want to harass you for more than that's 1% is worth but NOT so they can drive the car for 3.65 days in a year.

That is the situation DC Comics is in. They have the option of:

* Offering to buy Siegels out (Offer to pay for 1%) - Undoubtedly they've done this and the Siegels wanted way more than their express 1% is worth.
* Live with the inconvenience (Let sister drive 3.65 days/yr) - Use all aspects of the Superman IP they're entitled to and nothing else, meanwhile, strictly enforce their rights (so don't let sister drive 3.7 days/yr which cuts into your 99% share) the Siegels thin copyright is boxed in by a litany of other IP.
* Sue to claim Siegels don't own anything (Claiming grandpa got it wrong) - This is what they tried to do and lost in court on.
* Break the law and ignore the Siegels (don't let your sister drive 3.65 days/yr) - Possible option, but stupid because then the court will punish you by either forcing you to pay 25% for her share or pay 10% AND she gets to keep her share.
* Go back and offer Siegels more (Offer to pay sister 20%) - Mostly for the convenience of being free to use your IP as you want.

Meanwhile NO ONE will buy Siegels rights and Siegels don't even want to use them (Sister can't sell 1% of a car and doesn't care about driving 3.65 days a year, she just wants to squeeze you for money) -

Theoretically, another group could buy the IP, not to use, but just for the lawsuit value itself, but that's what's already happened... essentially, the Siegels' lawyer is "buying" the lawsuit with his legal services for a stake in the outcome... so he has no incentive to pass it on... the payout is not going to be so large that anyone (much less Disney or Marvel) need to buy the lawsuit for the sake of the settlement payout.

So we really needn't worry.

@ EdGross, and everyone else here.
Siegel and Shuster were two Jewish guys who made an Icon for America, backed up by an ideal that even if you're super-human then you should use your power for good, not for personal gain.Now, a good number of decade later....a couple of greedy (as the sin of Avarice it's-self) modern-era Jewish women are asking for money that they think is owed to them just because they are the daughters of the men who created Superman. They want money for a fact that is based upon chance and only chance...
These "ladies" are what the gentiles and those who are in the Jewish community would call Bad Jews.
There is a more specific word for what those of us would call these "Ladies", but I'm not going to waste good Yiddish on bad trash *Ptooie!*
If they want to bring ill on all of us then good. Makes them better target practice for an army of gentile, goy, and "God's Chosen" alike to hunt them down, the same way that Jewish mothers like to hunt down anybody or anythnig they don't like to have their offspring exposed to.

Fact is...yes it is unfortunate Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster sold all of their ownership of Superman over to DC. But it's still a business...and when you're dealing with BIG corporations like DC comics and Warner Bros...they shouldn't have expected too much sympathy or as EdGross put it- "morals" fact is, they're still a business and Siegel/Shuster made a bad business choice- so why punish the fans of the character by endangering the possibility of future films and comics?? That's what this will do, I understand they MIGHT make an out of court deal, but we aren't %100 certain of it either. I just think this whole thing is less about vengeance for Jerry, as it is about greed. I'm HOPING DC/WB can just pay the Siegels to shut the hell up already, but if an agreement can't be reached, it will endanger the Superman character as we know it. I just hope the Siegels aren't THAT stupid to ruin their chance at billions...since that's what they want- COLD HARD CASH.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking at first too, that there's no way they would let one of their top bread-winners just get taken away like that. But then I also noticed lately...Hal Jordan has been getting somewhat...bumped-up. As if DC is conditioning him to take over in the event that there may be no more Superman. I mean...lately Hal has gotten 2 of his own events in the comics- Sinestro Corps and Blackest Night, he's also getting his own film trilogy...and the "New Frontier" animated movie put Hal as the main hero. So it's making me increasingly worried about Superman...

Ok...I just hope GL doesn't become DC's new top hero...nothing against the character but I was just never much a fan. Oh i also forgot, aside from the "New Frontier" he also had his own animated film. Which I wouldn't have much a problem with...if Superman wasn't going through all this legal mumbo-jumbo because then it just causes me worry. But I hope you're right "thwhtGuardian"