In a possibly historic ruling, a federal judge Wednesday determined that the heirs of Superman co-creator, Jerry Siegel, are now the rightful owners of one-half of the copyright of Superman, and have been since 1999. The New York Times reported today that Judge Stephen Larson of the Central District of California had delivered a whopping 72 page ruling on the matter of who owns the copyright of Superman, establishing that "Action Comics" #1, the first appearance of Superman, was not considered to be a product of work-for-hire, making the copyright for that issue (and, naturally, the character of Superman) eligible for termination by Siegel’s heirs. What that means in simpler terms -- the Siegel's now own half of the Superman copyright.
The ruling was based upon changes made in 1976 to the Copyright Act, extending the total length of copyright protection for a character like Superman from 56 years to 75 years since creation. This change also allowed any copyright transfers to be terminated so that the original copyright owner (or his/her heirs) could gain the benefit of those extra 19 years of protection (with the presumption being that it would be unfair to the original copyright owners, as any deals they made before the change in law were based upon the 56 year duration, not 75).
DC has an array of defenses, but their best one was that "Action Comics" #1 was a work-for-hire, which means that DC would be considered the creator of the copyright. Larson ruled against DC on this point, stating that Siegel and Shuster sold their property (and the copyrights therein) to DC for $130, in a standard copyright transfer. It is this transfer that Siegel’s heirs filed for termination, which would have become effective in 1999, which Larson confirmed Wednesday.
There are a number of details still at play here, of course. The most notable right now is that DC will certainly appeal Larson’s decision. The second is that Larson left it open to a jury to determine both how much money Time Warner (owner of DC Comics) owes the Siegels for the usage of Superman since 1999 (note this is only for US rights of Superman, DC still maintains full international rights), and how many rights the Siegels have to characters created after "Action Comics" #1 (as those later issues were work-for-hire, but how many of these characters were derivatives of Superman?).
Finally, the most notable event for future details is that this opens up an extremely interesting situation in 2013. In 2013, Joe Shuster’s estate is eligible to terminate their half of the Superman copyright. You see, Shuster had no heirs, so his estate was unable to terminate those extra 19 years mentioned before, as the changes in 1976 to the Copyright Act were only available to authors or their heirs. In 1998, however, the Copyright Term Extension Act was passed, giving an additional 20 years to all copyrights established before 1978. Unlike the previous Copyright Act extension, the Act passed in 1998 gives the estate of Authors the right to terminate, as well. Therefore, in 2013, Shuster’s estate (represented by Shuster's nephew Mark Peary) will terminate just like Siegel’s heirs, meaning DC might very well lose the copyright to Superman entirely until 2033, at which point Superman would enter the public domain. Of course, who knows whether Congress will pass another extension before then.
I doubt that'd happen. Whenever a copyright extension act occurs in the US, it's because Steamboat Willie (the first Mickey Mouse cartoon) is about to enter the public domain, and IIRC that's meant to happen at about the same time Superman might go the same way.
DaveJB wrote:I doubt that'd happen. Whenever a copyright extension act occurs in the US, it's because Steamboat Willie (the first Mickey Mouse cartoon) is about to enter the public domain, and IIRC that's meant to happen at about the same time Superman might go the same way.
Right, I agree. Just thinking about the possibility of that, though, is mind boggling.
Hmm, but doesn't DC still own the trademark to Superman, and pretty much everything that came after Action Comics #1? How much will just owning the copyright on Action Comics #1 really affect the Superman merchandising machine?
Trademarks are tricky things. They lapse easily if they're not constantly used and tend to only cover a narrow range of products. DC could own the trademark for Superman comic books but not own it for Superman movies, videogames, TV shows or action figures, depending on how long it's been since one of those was produced.
It also only covers the actual name of the product. After all, Marvel Comics owns the trademark for Captain Marvel but that didn't stop DC from publishing their own Captain Marvel comics under the name "Shazam," so if the Superman copyright expired but the trademark didn't someone else could easily produce comics with the Superman character provided they didn't title it "Superman."
"Stop! No one can survive these deadly rays!"
"These deadly rays will be your death!"
- Thor and Akton, Starcrash
"Before man reaches the moon your mail will be delivered within hours from New York to California, to England, to India or to Australia by guided missiles.... We stand on the threshold of rocket mail."
- Arthur Summerfield, US Postmaster General 1953 - 1961
DaveJB wrote:I doubt that'd happen. Whenever a copyright extension act occurs in the US, it's because Steamboat Willie (the first Mickey Mouse cartoon) is about to enter the public domain, and IIRC that's meant to happen at about the same time Superman might go the same way.
That's a good point.
So. Is there anything that can be done, starting now while there's something of a head start, to stop them from extending the duration of copyright yet another fucking time when Disney starts sniffing their cash cow slipping away from their greedy, clutching fingers?
Considering all the abuse DC's writers have inflicted on Superman, from dying, being replaced by four doppelgangers, being resurrected, being forced to give up the identity "Clark Kent," becoming an energy being (why didn't they just create a new character instead of changing an established character to the point where he's unrecognizable), getting an energy being twin, becoming classic Superman again before a psychic brainwashes him into a paranoid nut with an itchy "trigger finger"...
Really, the judge's decision was right. Hopefully, this will force DC to stop abusing their characters.
Those gun nuts do not understand the meaning of "overkill," and will simply use weapon after weapon of mass destruction (WMD) until the monster is dead, or until they run out of weapons.
They have more WMD than there are monsters for us to fight. (More insanity here.)
