Super Complicated

Readers of this blog will know how interested I am in creators' rights.  Some of the most famous characters of 20th century pop culture were created under dubious legal and financial conditions.  The copyright to Superman was transferred from Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, the writer and artist, to their publisher for the sum of $130.  That was $10 per page for their first 13 page Superman story.  In order to get paid for their work, they lost control of their creation.

The latest U.S. copyright law allows for creators who sold their copyrights to regain them during specific time periods.  If the creators are deceased, their heirs have the right to pursue the copyright.

Jerry Seigel's heirs have filed to regain their half of the Superman copyright.  Joe Shuster's heirs are eligible to file in the near future.  Both are represented by attorney Marc Toberoff.

On the face of it, it's a nice, clear story.  Two little guys were taken advantage of, lost millions of dollars as a result, and now their families are going up against a large multinational corporation to get just compensation.  A David and Goliath story with an ending that should be a foregone conclusion.

However, the story is a lot more complicated and I urge you to read this entry by Daniel Best.  Even if you skip over the actual legal documents and just read Best's commentary (scattered throughout the documents), you can see that the families have made some poor decisions and done some questionable things.  Their lawyer appears to be working for himself as much or more than for his clients.  While I am not a fan of large corporations, Paul Levitz, a comics fan who eventually became publisher of DC Comics, acted more ethically than others in this dispute.

If nothing else, this situation just emphasizes the importance of owning creative properties.  It is important for creative people to understand the problems that can result from giving up ownership.  While the animation business doesn't perfectly mirror the comics business, the issues are the same and stakes are equally high.  If you have created something on your own and are looking for somebody else to finance it or market it, make sure you understand the repercussions of transferring copyright and allowing someone else to establish the trademark.  If not, the result might be several lifetimes of pain and legal squabbling.

Read This Letter

"My daughter Laura and I, as well as the Shuster estate, have done nothing more than exercise our rights under the Copyright Act. Yet, your company has chosen to sue us and our long-time attorney for protecting our rights."

Nikki Finke has published a letter from the late Joanne Siegel to Jeffrey Bewkes, Chairman and CEO of Time Warner, Inc.

The Siegel estate has been fighting to recapture their share of the copyright to Superman. Under U.S.copyright law, works sold to companies can be recovered by the creators at specified periods. There is no question that Superman was not a work for hire. Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster created it independently and tried selling it for years before it was bought by what was to become DC comics, now owned by Time Warner.

I've spent a fair amount of time on this blog warning creators about losing their rights. Anyone who has an idea that they hope to bring to the public needs to read this letter. Paste a copy of it wherever you do your creative work to remind you that it's possible to create a billion dollar property and still have to fight for what's legally yours.

"As for this letter, the purpose is three-fold:

"To protest harassment of us that will gain you nothing but bad blood and a continued fight.

"To protest harassment of our attorney by falsely accusing him of improper conduct in an attempt to deprive us of legal counsel.

"To make you aware that in reality this is a business matter and that continuing with litigation for many more years will only benefit your attorneys.

"This is not just another case. The public and press are interested in Superman and us and are aware of our and your litigations.

"The solution to saving time, trouble, and expense is a change of viewpoint. Laura and I are legally owed our share of Superman profits since 1999. By paying the owed bill in full, as you pay other business bills, it would be handled as a business matter, instead of a lawsuit going into its 5th year."

Truth, Justice, and the American Way

Sometimes the good guys win. It just takes an awfully long time.

In 1938, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster sold the first Superman story for publication. They were paid ten dollars per page for a grand total of $130. At that moment, they handed the publisher the ownership of one of the twentieth century's most popular and profitable characters. For the first few years, they were well compensated by being paid to continue to produce Superman. But as the character's popularity spread to radio, newspapers, movies and animated cartoons, Siegel and Shuster realized that they were not sharing in the wealth.

In the 1940's, they sued to regain the copyright and lost. They dropped their claim in exchange for a cash settlement. In the 1970s, when the first Christopher Reeve Superman movie was being made, a concerted publicity campaign by cartoonists on behalf of Siegel and Shuster shamed Warner Bros, who had bought Superman's publisher, into providing an annual pension for the character's creators.

Under a provision of the copyright law, the original owners of a property have the ability to regain their copyright. Both Siegel and Shuster are dead, but Siegel's widow and daughter have taken Warner Bros. to court and gotten a decision which restores a portion of Superman's copyright to them.

There is much that still must be negotiated and undoubtedly there will be more time spent in court. However, one of the great pop culture miscarriages of justice has been rectified. You can read about the decision here and here.

Siegel and Shuster's history should be taught in every art and animation school in the world. No creator should ever sign away ownership of a property without receiving a binding, ongoing financial interest in all the revenue that the property generates. Creators should think long and hard before giving control of their characters to corporate interests, regardless of the financial deal offered. If J.K. Rowling had sold Harry Potter as a spec movie script, she would not own the characters and would be considerably less wealthy than she is today. It was her good fortune that she created Harry Potter as a book, where it is routine for authors to own their copyrights.

Don't trust to fortune. It took 70 years for Siegel and Shuster to receive justice and neither lived long enough to savor it. Be smarter than they were.