On a separate note, am I the only person on the internet that thinks this bullshit is a tragedy on an epic scale? The greedy children of one of the creators of superman have sued Warner Brothers for a share of the revenue from the Superman IP. How are they entitled to these funds? Their father sold his rights to someone else, and even after that DC Comics felt that they should give him $20,000 – $30,000 a year for thinking up the character. So, in the end he was likely paid several hundred thousand dollars for the use of a character that he originally sold for $130 bucks. These kind of sales go on everday. Should I purchase a website from someone and be afraid that 5 or 10 years down the road, I’ll be sued for a cut of the site’s revenues? No. Once the sale is made, then that’s final. It’s mine. or in this case, Warner Brother’s.
It wasn’t Jerome Siegel that made superman great, it was the company that published the stories, and all the work that they’ve put into the IP. I’m ok with recognizing the hard work that people put in on my favorite stories, and I recognize that without Jerome Siegel and Joseph Shuster Superman as we know him wouldn’t exist. But the hardwork that they put in was paid for, and their children or even his widow aren’t entitled to the revenues of other people’s work, in this case the Superman Returns movie. They’re no more entitled then John Byrne, Mark Millar, or Mark Waid.
Put me down for a Superman Neck Umbrella Stand, thanks.
Obviously talent doesn’t run in that family, or they’d make a living by more honest means. Spongers.
Not that I even like Superman, but next to Pedobear, he’s the goddamn Batman.
I don’t think the family should get anything at all. Dumbass sold his rights to Superman for $130 then his loss. Props for them trying tho, very American.
It is very American to get the copyright back. Under the laws of the time that they sold the copyright, it reverted back to them or their heirs after 56 years. All copyrights reverted back to the original creators – not just the Superman copyright. That got extended in 1976, with the provision that the original copyright holders or their heirs could challenge the extension in court, if the original copyright still had value.
The sale of a copyright wasn’t intended to be forever – the rights were sold for 28 or 56 years. Then the contract could be renegotiated. The idea that copyright transfer is permanent is a relatively new one, designed to favor wealthy investors over (poor) individual creators.
All this applies only to US law, of course. YMMV
So, crooks buy off the rights to a character because they’re desperate for rent money, and that’s fine with you? Truth and Justice, asshole, truth and justice.
Let us hope that Steve Ditko (Spider-man) fares as well.
Yeah, I will side with the family on this over Time Warner anyday. $130 was a lot back then, and he had kids to feed. What would you do? Also, they aren’t taking money out of the pockets of other artists (& actors, directors, etc etc) who have worked on SM related projects, they are taking their share from one of the biggest media corporations in the world. Sounds fair to me.