Paul Levitz was a part-time, low-level employee (at best) when Siegel & Shuster went public. Carmine Infantino was the front man for DC & Warner Communications at the time. And he took the bullet when Warner decided to settle.

From every indication I've ever seen, Paul deserves nothing but praise for his work to make the terms of the settlement better every year for the last 15 or 20.

Hey Jim:

Thanks for posting. When you say "he took the bullet" you mean Carmine Infantino, correct?

Yeah, it was Carmine. (Direct antecedent and all that.)

So when all is said and done and the chips have all landed does this mean that as 50% owners of the characters copyright and all associated characters copyrights that the Siegels will be able to make a publishing deal with any company or person they choose?

In other words will a company such as Marvel, Image, Dark Horse, etc be able to publish Superman (c) Siegel. If they so desire to make such a deal?



------------------
Arriving one day if I can find the time is
http://www.discovercomics.com

The short answer is: who knows? The new Journal adds some legal opinions that seem to indicate that it would be a long road for the Siegels to fight for 50% of everything. A settlement appears likely. Of course, if they are in this for final vindication of all of Jerry Siegel's grievances with DC, it could be the long march.

------------------
"I love him like a brother. David Greenglas." -- Woody Allen - Crimes & Misdemeanors

Hey Jim:

I wouldn't be surprised. (Re: long wait) nothing of real value really comes easy.

Since it doesn't seem to have been addressed yet, I thought I'd pass along the content of the original release form which was signed by S&S (courtesy of Harlan Ellison's essay, "Did YOUR Mother Throw YOURS Out?" reprinted in EDGEWORKS 3). Hope it provides some illumination.

---------------------------------------------

"I, the undersigned, am an artist or author and have performed work for strip entitled 'SUPERMAN.'
In consideration of $130.00 agreed to be paid to me by you, I hereby sell and transfer such work and strip, all good will attached thereto, and exclusive right to use the characters and story, continuity and title of strip contained therein, to you and your assigns to have and hold forever and to be your exclusive property and I agree not to employ said characters or said story in any other strips or sell any like strip or story containing the same characters by their names contained therein or under any other names at any time hereafter to any other person, firm or corporation, or permit the use thereof by said other parties without obtaining your written consent therefor. The intent hereof is to give you exclusive right to use and acknowledge that you own said characters or story and the use thereof, exclusively. I have received the above sum of money."

---------------------------------------------
- Frank

As I understand it, when Siegel and Shuster sued DC in the 40's, DC had to admit that they had LOST the original agreement that had been signed. Instead, the company submitted what they termed a "reconstruction" of what the paperwork probably said. As the main points of the case did not turn on that agreement, the question was not addressed as to whether (a) the document accurately represented what Jerry and Joe signed and (b) whether or not there were other documents which expanded on or modified the terms. Siegel and Shuster had several employment contracts over the years which further embellished the terms of their relationship with DC.

In any case, I believe the document that Harlan quoted was DC's reconstruction.

Hey Frank:


To quote a certain Vulcan: "Fascinating!"

Thanks for posting.

Hey Mark:


To quote a ... ah, you get the picture!

Thanks for posting the "behind the scenes" and giving us more to think about.