Siegels & Shusters Lose Case Over Superman to DC Entertainment

LibraryBoy

So sayeth Bleeding Cool:

Daniel Best of Oh Danny Boy presents the legal document that will give Marc Toberoff and the Siegel and Shuster estates an un-merry Christmas. But give DC Entertainment lawyers some festive cheer. That the judge has ruled

“…the copyright termination notice served by the Estate of Joseph Shuster on November 10, 2003, is deemed invalid and ineffective,”

and that the Siegel and Shuster lawyer’s

“…rights-encumbering agreements—including the 2001 Pacific Pictures agreement, 2003 Pacific Pictures agreement, and 2008 consent agreement—are deemed invalid and unenforceable.”

Daniel points out that there will, of course, be plenty of appeals. So the case will be contiunuing into the launch of the new Man Of Steelk movie…

So, @JoeSergi, care to enlighten us a little as to what this actually means for DC, the Siegel and Shuster heirs, and Superman himself?

Basically, if DC officially owns Superman lock, stock, and barrel, does this mean he can finally go back to wearing his over-underpants costume and toss that hideous armor in the Fortress of Solitude recycling bin?

Matt

It seems like a year cannot go by without this lawsuit coming up. I'm glad Batman & the Kane family don't have this issue with DC!

M

nweathington

Matt said:

It seems like a year cannot go by without this lawsuit coming up. I'm glad Batman & the Kane family don't have this issue with DC!

M

That's only because Kane had better (more legally sound) contracts with DC, with little room for ambiguity, and Kane signed over all his rights to the character in 1968 for a then-considerable sum of money.