Not a dream! Not an imaginary story! But Jerry Siegel's wife and daughter have succeeded in getting his part of the copyright to SUPERMAN back!! Check out Matt Brady's excellent reporting at http://anotheruniverse.com/comics/features/supermanrights.html

------------------
Rick Veitch
Invites You To Read THE DAILY RARE BIT FIENDS
updated every day along with news of the world's most popular artform!
THE COMICON.COM DAILY SPLASHis always refreshing!
www.comicon.com/splash

Well, I think you and Alan Moore need to get in touch with these folks about doing a new Superman comic-- and doing it right!

That is-- I just read the Matt Brady article, and that COULD be done, correct?

Let's hear a rousing cheer for the little guy on this one!

Attempting to put politics and legalities aside (which may not be possible in a situation like this), I find it very comforting that the Siegal's family (if not Siegel himself) will see a share of the quite-substantial money pie that DC and TimeWarner have baked with Supes over the past 60 years.

It also presents interesting possibilities. Superman could now conceivably be licensed to ANY comic company. So long as DC/TW see 50 cents on the dollar, we could very well see the big red S next to a Marvel logo on a monthly basis. At least, it seems that simple after reading the SPLASH page. So anything that DC has not wanted to do with the character, the Siegals could very-well go ahead with anyway.

Kinda kooky, when you think about it.

But hey, it's only fair...after all this time. Siegal and Schuster created one of the most identifiable figures of this century. That Schuster wound up being a messenger boy only accents the bittersweet taste of this announcement.

Which leads me to wonder (and Rick, you might know the answer to this)...does Joe Schuster not have any surviving relatives that could also take action similar to that of the Siegal family. And if so....wouldn't that just darken the clouds over the DC office just a bit more?

Perhaps this is karmic retribution for that Kyle Baker-Elseworlds story getting killed at the last second. Which we could now, if I follow all this correctly, possibly see anyway.

Here to the future...crazy as it may be shaping up to be.

Matchstickboy (head spinning just a bit)

[This message has been edited by matchstickboy (edited 08-31-1999).]

Okay, just so I don't sound completely stupid, I realize that DC still owns the TRADEMARK to the character... which might put a whole lot of legal restrictions on what the Siegels could do with their share of the copyright...

But... you and Mr. Moore should still look into it!!

Hot Dog-- we might see a return of the real Superman (the one who grew up being Superboy!) after all!

Why, oh why, can no one in the entire comic art community spell the names of Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster?

I can spell their names right. [img]http://207.69.158.95/ubb/wink.gif[/img] Siegel-Shuster..creators of the very character that drove me into comics. To me this is a happy day since I know that the family is finally getting a measure of justice. The very thing that Superman stands for.

It doesn't erase the past but it'll sure help the family in the future I'm sure. I also just got into a huge brawl with another fellow creator over this story...pretty weird..I would think creators everywhere would be elated to see a sound victory in our camps for once. And this person is pissed off and feels that an un-justice has been done to DC because he thinks once Siegel and Shuster signed the contracts it was "oh well".

I don't understand this persons attitude..and I'd hope that creators everywhere are teaming with excitement over this. Anyone else talking to anyone feeling the way this person did?



------------------
Eric L. Kent
"Tragic Heroes" and "Logan and the Bunny Squadron" coming soon to a shop near you
www.ancientstudios.com

Eric,

in response to your brawl over the issue, according to the lawyer I worked with on this article, this is a textbook case of why such laws are in effect - young creators may not have all the resources necessary to fully exploit their creation at the time of, um..creation (feeling like Austin Powers here....).

This way, creators can terminate teh transfer and still make money off of their creation when it has been exploited.

Now, as to whether or not THAT law is fair is a whole 'nother matter, but that's what's on the books today.

Matt

[This message has been edited by mbrady (edited 08-31-1999).]

[This message has been edited by mbrady (edited 08-31-1999).]

This made my day!

Hey Rick V.:

Maybe the Maximortal saga could have a happy ending after all?

Barry Buchanan
"THE BALLADOF UTOPIA"
[url]www.blackdaze.com

wow.

One question: I was really excited that this new ruling might mean EVERY creator would get some rights to their original characters, until I read the distinction of Superman being a character brought to a publisher rather than a character created by someone working for a publisher under a "create some new characters" job or somesuch.

So... are there any other creators or characters that are affected by this new ruling?



------------------
Jared Smith
jared@marsimport.com
owner
Mars Import
www.marsimport.com
"Quality Earth comics"

A bevvy of random thoughts:

1) Can we change the name of the thread to Siegel (with an "e")?

2) I read Matt Brady's excellent piece and I gather that this doesn't retroactively entitle the Siegels to 50% of what DC made on the Big S over the decades -- only from April 1999, correct? So this is more about the future than the past, no?

3) What about the trademark? TARZAN OF THE APES and the early Mickey strips are in public domain already, and can be (& have been) reprinted by third parties, but because Disney and ERB control the trademarks, it's virtually impossible to do anything practical with them beyond a facsimile reprint of the original edition.

4) What about Mr Shuster's heirs?

5) Last year, in France, big comics publisher Dargaud lost the publishing rights to all the ASTERIX books to creator/artist Albert Uderzo after a long and protracted legal battle.

Pretty much everyone agreed that Uderzo was right (wrongdoings had indeed been committed by Dargaud in the 60s or 70s), but also that the *current* Dargaud management was blameless, and that removing the ASTERIX books, which reportedly accounted for 60% of profits, from Dargaud's catalog would deal a harsh blow to the publisher.

Indeed, the result of this has been to cause Dargaud to cancel publishing agreements, to stop publishing series that sold less than 15000 copies, to not take in young artists' projects, etc.

Cleverly, in the Public Relation arena, Dargaud succeeded in portraying themselves as the victims, and showed how Uderzo's victory was going to hurt the less fortunate members of the industry. (Which was not entirely inaccurate.) Uderzo was made to appear aloof and selfish, and that, combined with a certain amount of professional jealousy, I'm sure, caused him to appear as the villain in many press articles and on the Net.

In the current state of the industry, I wonder what kind of impact will losing 50% of SUPERMAN's revenues will have on the rest of DC? And if Paul Levitz plays the Dargaud "card"(e.g.: "I'm cancelling all of VERTIGO books because of the Siegels' actions), how this will play in Peoria?


JM



[This message has been edited by JM Lofficier (edited 08-31-1999).]