A Letter from Lois Lane to Warner Bros.
- Thread starter Vivek
- Start date
God bless her. Warner Bros. and DC should be ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES.
I agree. I hope in 2013 they lose the rights and the family takes them to town selling the rights back to them. Sadly they aren't the only creators who had this happen to them either. There should be a boycott of everything Superman related to show DC and WB that the readers are with the families. It honestly sounds like the companies hope to kill off the family with stress so they won't have to give up the rights.
firesprite
Master Member
Wow.. Good for her, calling them out on their bulls**t. I doubt it will have much impact on WB or their attorneys but I hope like hell, they find some shred of decency and just give the families what they're due, finally.
Too Much Garlic
Master Member
I had no idea. I'll be mindful about any WB movie coming up that I had planned to go see. Not gonna happen if they are THIS money grabbing.
Give the creators what's theirs.
Give the creators what's theirs.
Egon Spengler
Master Member
I won't be seeing the new Superman movie. It'll probably be crap anyway.
thumbsdown
It's NOT the American way.... It's the greedy persons' with no-connection-to-actual-strip idea-generation and production way.
Also, something else to consider.... WHO'S paying for the production of all those comic books and comic strips???? Granted, the creators do deserve a slice of the money the strips generate, but are they doing all the production and publicity work???
This situation happens all over the world.
People are lucky when a big company treats them right! Japan, for instance, treats strip creators better than most other countries. You have to look out for yourself and lawyer-up to keep from getting screwed! You have to constantly be on top of things. The more you own and control something you created, the more rewards you can get. It's also true that if you DON'T promote your ideas and yourself, you won't get butkiss...
Unfortunately, when Superman was created, Siegel and Shuster had a hell of a time selling the character to ANYONE. They spent 4-5 years dogging the major comic strip syndicators trying to get someone to buy their idea and put it into print. Back then, and perhaps more so than today, creators could make a lot more with a comic strip and be recognized by the entire country. There were several strip creators like Al Capp ("Li'l Abner") who were as famous as movie stars but made far more money than movie stars back then did.
I'm sorry, but Siegel and Shuster DO deserve some of the blame over what happened to them. They were young and very naive, and trusted the wrong people who, as said by Wes R, screwed many other people, too. You also don't hear about what they were paid back in the day, too. Siegel and Shuster were making at least $100,000 a year in the 1940s. That's millionaire money today. They didn't invest or save any of it, though.
The thing is that the Siegel family may be asking for a lot more than what they could ever possibly expect to get... We'll see what happens. Joan Siegel, widow of Jerry Siegel, died during litigation procedures that have lasted well over a decade. I wonder if it's really worth it to put yourself under stress over money. It's not as if the Siegels were never getting money, period. The pension they received from Warners at least tripled or quadrupled over the years since the mid-1970s because of the efforts of DC Comics' past publisher/president and past chief editor. Be very, very careful when you leap to somebody else's defense and get more facts before you open your mouth. The whole story rarely gets told.
CTF's post is typical of somebody who isn't aware of the full situation. THINK for yourself instead of automatically accepting what your government or media tells you. Many people are only aping what they've read or heard from a news article, and, brother, I can tell you most news people/reporters don't know jack**** much about what they're reporting on!!!
There have been other creators who have come to out-of-court settlements and seemed to be fine with DC Comics. The late creator of Green Lantern was satisfied by his settlement. He sure didn't waste his last few years groaning about his situation. He actually felt well-treated by DC Comics. I talked to one of his sons 12 years ago and that's what I was told.
Also, something else to consider.... WHO'S paying for the production of all those comic books and comic strips???? Granted, the creators do deserve a slice of the money the strips generate, but are they doing all the production and publicity work???
This situation happens all over the world.
People are lucky when a big company treats them right! Japan, for instance, treats strip creators better than most other countries. You have to look out for yourself and lawyer-up to keep from getting screwed! You have to constantly be on top of things. The more you own and control something you created, the more rewards you can get. It's also true that if you DON'T promote your ideas and yourself, you won't get butkiss...
Unfortunately, when Superman was created, Siegel and Shuster had a hell of a time selling the character to ANYONE. They spent 4-5 years dogging the major comic strip syndicators trying to get someone to buy their idea and put it into print. Back then, and perhaps more so than today, creators could make a lot more with a comic strip and be recognized by the entire country. There were several strip creators like Al Capp ("Li'l Abner") who were as famous as movie stars but made far more money than movie stars back then did.
I'm sorry, but Siegel and Shuster DO deserve some of the blame over what happened to them. They were young and very naive, and trusted the wrong people who, as said by Wes R, screwed many other people, too. You also don't hear about what they were paid back in the day, too. Siegel and Shuster were making at least $100,000 a year in the 1940s. That's millionaire money today. They didn't invest or save any of it, though.
The thing is that the Siegel family may be asking for a lot more than what they could ever possibly expect to get... We'll see what happens. Joan Siegel, widow of Jerry Siegel, died during litigation procedures that have lasted well over a decade. I wonder if it's really worth it to put yourself under stress over money. It's not as if the Siegels were never getting money, period. The pension they received from Warners at least tripled or quadrupled over the years since the mid-1970s because of the efforts of DC Comics' past publisher/president and past chief editor. Be very, very careful when you leap to somebody else's defense and get more facts before you open your mouth. The whole story rarely gets told.
CTF's post is typical of somebody who isn't aware of the full situation. THINK for yourself instead of automatically accepting what your government or media tells you. Many people are only aping what they've read or heard from a news article, and, brother, I can tell you most news people/reporters don't know jack**** much about what they're reporting on!!!
There have been other creators who have come to out-of-court settlements and seemed to be fine with DC Comics. The late creator of Green Lantern was satisfied by his settlement. He sure didn't waste his last few years groaning about his situation. He actually felt well-treated by DC Comics. I talked to one of his sons 12 years ago and that's what I was told.
Last edited:
P.S. -- It's a lie that Shuster had heirs. IMMEDIATE FAMILY-ONLY are eligible for heirs' benefits/money.
He divorced a LONG time ago and never had kids. He's been dead close to 20 years and NOBODY from extended family except a nephew ever came forward to claim anything.
Half the copyright still belongs to WB whether people like it or not.
I wished the Siegels well, but given the state of the health status of Joanne's daughter, I really think this is an exercise in futility.
I KNEW the WB lawyers would drag this out until at least Joanne Siegel died.
Guess what guys? Joanne Siegel died over a month ago! This letter is getting released late, and by a person (Nikki Finke) who isn't aware of the full history of thhe case. Ms. Finke has a tendency towards sensational articles and shooting off her mouth. Again, be careful of the sources and the people reporting.
He divorced a LONG time ago and never had kids. He's been dead close to 20 years and NOBODY from extended family except a nephew ever came forward to claim anything.
Half the copyright still belongs to WB whether people like it or not.
I wished the Siegels well, but given the state of the health status of Joanne's daughter, I really think this is an exercise in futility.
I KNEW the WB lawyers would drag this out until at least Joanne Siegel died.
Guess what guys? Joanne Siegel died over a month ago! This letter is getting released late, and by a person (Nikki Finke) who isn't aware of the full history of thhe case. Ms. Finke has a tendency towards sensational articles and shooting off her mouth. Again, be careful of the sources and the people reporting.
IndyFanChuck
Sr Member
Wow. I won't even respond to that. That's shameful that you think they have some blame in what happened to them.
Their families deserve the rights. Period. I'm a bit surprised to read someone say otherwise. It's almost like you have an Opinion OTHER than mine. When did this start happening?
Just wow.
:thumbsdown
Their families deserve the rights. Period. I'm a bit surprised to read someone say otherwise. It's almost like you have an Opinion OTHER than mine. When did this start happening?
Just wow.
:thumbsdown
DuneMuadDib
Sr Member
Just a little devil's advocate here, but didn't Siegel and Shuster sell the rights to Superman to DC back in 38 or whenever? Did they not willingly say "in exchange for X amount of money we renounce all legal claim to Superman and all associated etc. that we produce under employment for National Comics (now DC)?"
Provided they signed away in a valid and legally binding contract all rights to their creation then what exactly are their families legally entitled to? I admit to not knowing the ins and outs of the case, but if they sold the damned rights aren't they entitled to squat under the law?
Not defending DC/WB. Yes, DC (then National) was giving them a tiny bit of what was being made off the comic, and was interested in profit (capitalist economy after all).
I don't see how they're legally entitled to more money than they signed a contract for or rights they sold willingly for said money.
Provided they signed away in a valid and legally binding contract all rights to their creation then what exactly are their families legally entitled to? I admit to not knowing the ins and outs of the case, but if they sold the damned rights aren't they entitled to squat under the law?
Not defending DC/WB. Yes, DC (then National) was giving them a tiny bit of what was being made off the comic, and was interested in profit (capitalist economy after all).
I don't see how they're legally entitled to more money than they signed a contract for or rights they sold willingly for said money.
Look up the story of ugg boots and say that. :lol
Pappy
Well-Known Member
Are you new?:unsure
Oh wow....people(artists) were lucky when a big company treat them right! What?!:unsure You shouldn't bring this mind set in the first place!! Everyone should be given credit for their work and ideas without any difficulties,right? right?! yes,i knew its the real world situation...FIRST HAND!!
Lets take it with you on another situation,shall we? Do you like it when the company you're working on delaying your salary/payment for 2 months and making it very hard for you? And you knew that your company doesn't have any problems with their financials:unsure
It's not as if the Siegels were never getting money, period. The pension they received from Warners at least tripled or quadrupled over the years since the mid-1970s because of the efforts of DC Comics' past publisher/president and past chief editor.....Well,If the 'big companies' were That Nice they should continue to give credit Every Time they are using everything related to Superman to the artists or their families....So the 'Goodwill' stopped from the mid-70's? Superman still last 'till today though.......and hey! there's a new movie coming up.......yeah,took a lot of effort to beat a man's greed.
Granted, the creators do deserve a slice of the money the strips generate, but are they doing all the production and publicity work???
Production and publicity work? ok....and what they've produced and published? Right...they need the artist's creation to do that,just a basic win-win business deal,and i guarantee that the company wouldn't spent much money on the first round,not after they knew that the product's is well accepted and generate more income.
The late creator of Green Lantern was satisfied by his settlement
God bless him,but satisfied doesn't mean that is the right amount being paid for his rights,in the music industry there are the artist's rights(for the performer and all) and mechanical rights(for the song creator) from total income,what's in the comic book? And let me guess...he must 'fight' for those back then right?:unsure
This letter is getting released late, and by a person (Nikki Finke) who isn't aware of the full history of the case
And you somehow knew? I'm interested to know your sources
I don't care if the man who had his work used by a company got,lets say a mental illness,he/she deserved what they should deserved! NO LESS
DuneMuadDib We can assume what we like,but we don't know how the contract were written are we?
DuneMuadDib
Sr Member
Fair point. On the assumption that the original contract completely bought them out, I don't see how anyone related to them is owed anything in a legal sense unless there's a precedent for coughing up more money after the fact if the work was a huge success (reminds me of the LotR actors wanting more scratch after the films were basically printing money).
Legal issues aside, with the disgusting amount of money that Superman generated it would have been a nice and moral thing to do to throw them some "hey, we wouldn't have all this money if you hadn't come up with the idea so here's a percentage that's not insulting" money. That wasn't done though, so are the courts enforcing precedents, or just penalizing WB/DC for exploiting the contract?
Legal issues aside, with the disgusting amount of money that Superman generated it would have been a nice and moral thing to do to throw them some "hey, we wouldn't have all this money if you hadn't come up with the idea so here's a percentage that's not insulting" money. That wasn't done though, so are the courts enforcing precedents, or just penalizing WB/DC for exploiting the contract?
Similar threads
