That's it. Enough. We are capable of so many things -- putting a man on the moon, splitting the atom -- and I'm suppose to believe that a deal can't be worked out for the Siegels?
No way.
Effective immediately, I'm boycotting Superman Comics. No more. I maybe just one man and what I'm doing may seem insignificant but I'm going to do for the memory of Siegel and Shuster!
Anybody with me?

I'm with ya.

Years ahead of you, in fact.

Let me get this straight... You're calling for a boycott because DC doesn't want to lose half the profits to one of its most saleable characters to someone (two of them, actually) who had absolutely nothing to do with the creation of the character?

Jesus -- if you're going to boycott Superman, boycott the property for artistic reasons, at least.

Uh.. they didn't have nothing to do with the creation of the characters.

The wife of Jerry Siegel is the physical model of Lois Lane.

BTW: I'm 100% positive Jerry Siegel would want this. I'm sure one of the reasons he tried so hard and for so long to get Superman back is so that his wife and kids could be well off, even after he is gone.


------------------
Regards,
Jamie Coville
The History of Superhero Comic Books!
http://www.sigma.net/comichistory/

Whatever Siegel's reasons for fighting the company that robbed him at pen point, is there any reason that we should support a company that was built on legal theft? Publishers in every field other than comic books recognize their role as middleman, and it's only in comic books that there's any suggestion that a corporation should be ascribed the title of "creator".

If, as described elsewhere, Paul Levitz is acting in a moral capacity and fashion, then all praise for his efforts should be accredited to him and not the corporation he's paid to represent. There is no reason to ever pity or feel sympathy for a corporation who's sole purpose is to enrich it's top executives by dint of the labor of those who toil in it's shadow. Even if Mrs. Siegel wasn't the model for Lois Lane (which she was), and even if she wasn't there as a support for Jerry from the very beginning and through all hard times (which, again, she was), I'd still be happier with someone who did no harm to Jerry Siegel benefitting from his labors than I would be if I knew that those who'd fiscally benefitted from his work were those who'd ethically screwed him (or were the beneficiaries thereof.)


-Ed

Sorry Darren.
I must repectfully disagree. In fact, personally, I was REALLY waiting for the new writers that were coming on to Supes in 151.
But I feel that I'm part of the problem by buying Superman.
I know that, from what I've read, Mr. Levitz has a very unenviable position (trying his best to broker a deal) but that's not my point.

I'm making my stand.

Give the heirs a fair deal!!!!!

Thanks John!!!

Anybody else?

Give the heirs a fair deal!!!!

(Anybody want to come up with a better "rallying cry" -- please do)

Hey Jaime!

TOTAL AGREEMENT!

>>Give the heirs a fair deal!<<<

Hey Ed!

Yeah! Couldn't have said it better!


>>Give the heirs a fair deal!!<<

I'd support the boycott-- but I'd say that along with the boycott, you send letters expressing support for him and the Siegel's case... but saying that until Time/Warner straightens up, you won't be buying any more Superman products.

The letter would need to be a necessary component of the boycott.