ROTTEN TOMATOES: Judge Grants Co-Creator's Heirs Share of Superman Copyright Comments

Judge Grants Co-Creator's Heirs Share of Superman Copyright

by Jeff Giles | April 01, 2008

Summary

Superman's path back to the big screen -- already proving itself to be surprisingly long and winding after 2006's Superman Returns -- may have just gotten even longer and more treacherous. Back to Article

(1-11 of 11 posts) | Reply

Gimy writes:
on Apr 01 2008 06:03 AM

yep...more of a reason the sequels will probably not get made. took em how long to get that last flick(that was average) out?? just have an actual villian this time and people might actually give a crap. and no, other than comic nerds...most people won't believe Luthor can take down a superhuman guy. its just not believeable...sorry. especially since he can hear everybody in the world(but can't hear luthor's plans??).

(Reply to this)

TombstoneLawDog writes:
on Apr 01 2008 06:34 AM

Gimy;

Apparently Supes can only hear you if you're 'crying out for a savior.'

I dunno how to feel about this, actually. On the one hand I think it's a no-brainer that Siegel and Schuster should get something for their creation, despite having signed away their rights--they got righteously dicked. On the other hand, Jesus F#cking CHRIST, can't anyone take a dump without someone else suing to get a piece of it?!

(Reply to this)

dedalus7 writes:
on Apr 01 2008 07:46 AM

I just sued my cat for pooping on the carpet. But he counter sued and now he owns everything! And now he poops on the carpet at will! (will's not happy either)

(Reply to this)

LordVapor writes:
on Apr 01 2008 09:23 AM

Just when you think the Supes' news can't get any more depressing...

Love how on I am Legend, in the first scene at Times Square, there is an ad for the "Batman and Superman" movie.

(Reply to this)

TombstoneLawDog writes:
on Apr 01 2008 10:12 AM

In reply to this comment (#1664375)
Dude, that was pretty funny!

(Reply to this)

NatureBoy4 writes:
on Apr 01 2008 10:17 AM

Sure, Siegel and Shuster only created the first iconic superhero ever, which all other superheroes are based on, their families don't deserve a dime for that. Of course a Hollywood studio does, they do all the hard work, like trying to re-invent something beloved by comic book fans eveywhere.

(Reply to this)

High School With Money writes:
on Apr 01 2008 10:58 AM

Finally, whiners are legally bound to stop complaining that Superman only has one weakness. Apparently he has two more, and getting them to agree to anything new in a timely manner would be harder than saying Mix-Yes-Spit-Lick's name backwards.

(Reply to this)

renodc writes:
on Apr 01 2008 11:41 AM

This is the cancer of liberalism, which has already permeated our judicial system and turned it into an absolute joke. It's all about entitlement and what I should get even though I didn't earn it. Siegel and Shuster sold the rights to DC, and therefore their heirs should have absolutely no ground to stand on. It's not Warner or DC's fault that Siegel and Shuster were dumb enough to sell the rights for $130.

(Reply to this)

IMAmoose24 writes:
on Apr 01 2008 03:07 PM

At least Justice League wont happen yet.

(Reply to this)

davenav writes:
on Apr 01 2008 08:31 PM

I'm a bit surprised to see so many taking the corporate position. Oh wait, this is Rotten Tomatoes...owned by FOX. Maybe I'm not so surprised.

Let me be a happy minority that is glad that the actual creators of a character might get a small piece of the profit created by their creation.

(Reply to this)

Siler_117 writes:
on Apr 01 2008 08:33 PM

back off guys...superman needs to finally fight Doomsday and die...then be revived and then let the series end...that would be best for such a great series...excluding 3 and 4 of course

(Reply to this)