This has got to be some sort of divine intervention for fans of the Man Of Steel.
A court case this week involving Warner Bros., DC Comics and the heirs of “Superman” co-creator Jerome Siegel has yielded some interesting results with massive ramifications for the future of the “Superman” franchise in general and, in particular, at Warner Bros.
First off, the court found that the license fees WB paid to corporate sibling DC Comics didn’t represent “sweetheart” deals as they weren’t below fair market value. This meant the heirs will be able seek profits only from DC Comics rather than from WB as well. Nothing major here.
After the hearing though, Attorney Marc Toberoff, who represents heirs Joanne Siegel and Laura Siegel Larson, asserted in a written statement that the Siegel heirs and the heirs of co-creator Joe Shuster will own the entire Superman copyright in 2013. He also revealed that the judge found that WB should have paid three to four times the amount actually paid for the Superman film rights and that he had found it “inequitable” that DC transferred the Superman film rights to WB without the standard term providing for reversion for lack of ongoing exploitation.
Toberoff added that subsequently “the Court pointedly ruled that if Warner Bros. does not start production on another Superman film by 2011, the Siegels will be able to sue to recover their damages,” and that “the Siegels look forward to the remainder of the case, which will determine how much defendants owe them for their exploitations of Superman.”
Be that as it may, Warner Bros. chairman Alan Horn had earlier testified that hopes were to make another “Superman” movie but that the property wasn’t under development, that no script had been written and that 2012 would be the earliest another “Superman” pic could be released. This coming off the back of Brandon Routh revealing that his own contract to portray the Man of Steel has also expired.
So in summary, WB are set to lose the rights to Superman in 2013 and if they don’t start production on a Superman movie by 2011, they may be sued for not making use of the rights and hence thrawting the Siegel heir of income. Of course, the possibility exists that comes 2013, the heirs of the Superman creators will simply work out a deal with WB for the rights once again but that would seem unlikely given the state of the relationship.
Of course, there is also the anti-climatic possibility that WB may just bite the bullet and keep the franchise in a state of flux. Spending money making a Superman film could actually be more financially detrimental than sustaining the court battle and, if worse comes to worst, simply coughing up whatever they need to pay could be a more viable option.
All parties are due back in court on December 1st but surely we’ll hear more from this before then especially if WB want to make the 2011 deadline. [Variety]
A very good post, but I think this Toberoff fellow is jerking your chain a little bit.
What the judge actually wrote, for example, about the fair market price for the Superman movie rights, is that there was no perfectly analogous property for determining its value, and the best comparison he could come up with was X-Men:
"Given the close proximity of the Superman initial option payment to that found in the film
agreements for the lesser known comics mentioned above, the value of well-known properties with
great public awareness, and allowing for some inflation of the purchase price terms for the X-Men
film licensing agreement from the mid-1990s (due to the increased interest studios exhibited for
comic book properties at the time), the Court finds that a reasonable, market-driven, up-front fixed
purchase price/initial option payment for the Superman property during the relevant period would
have been somewhere in the range of $4 to $6 million, rather than the $1.5 million in the film
agreement."
Not certain that it's a given that the Siegels get 100 percent of the Superman rights back in 2013, either.