Daily Report Online
  • News
  • Special Reports
  • Court Opinions
  • Court Calendars
  • Bench Guide
  • Public Notices
  • Contact
  • Books
  • Events
  • Classifieds

Home > Warner Bros. wins Superman battle

Font Size: increase font decrease font

News

Warner Bros. wins Superman battle

The Litigation Daily

January 14, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

O'Melveny & Myers scored a big win for Warner Brothers Entertainment Inc. on Thursday in the company's ugly copyright battle with the heirs to the creators of Superman.

In a 6-page ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the heirs of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel signed away their rights to the Man of Steel in a 2001 agreement with Warner Brothers. The Siegel family, represented by Hollywood attorney Marc Toberoff, had argued that the 2001 deal wasn't binding. The Ninth Circuit rejected that argument, noting that Siegel's then-lawyer called the agreement a "monumental accord." The ruling deals the Siegels a major blow in their decades-long bid to increase their share of the Superman profits.

Siegel and cartoonist Joseph Shuster created the Superman character in 1932, when they were high school students in Cleveland, Ohio. Six years later, they sold their rights in the character to Detective Comics (now Warner Brothers subsidiary DC Comics Inc.) for just $130 and a contract to supply the publisher with material. Decades later, Warner Brothers gave Siegel and Shuster lifetime pensions of $20,000 per year, even though it said it had "no legal obligation" to do so. After both Siegel and Shuster died in 1999, their family members tried to reclaim their copyrights based on a provision in the Copyright Act of 1976 that allows artists to regain control of their works after 35 years—so-called "termination rights."

The Siegels reached a deal with Warner Brothers in 2001 in which they gave up their termination rights in exchange for $3 million in cash upfront and several million more in contingent compensation. With Toberoff's help, they later tried to undo that deal, arguing that there was no meeting of the minds, and therefore no binding contract. But the Ninth Circuit found that an October 2001 letter by the Siegels' then-attorney "constituted an acceptance of the terms negotiated between the parties, and thus was sufficient to create a contract."



Subscribe to The Litigation Daily

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • O'Melveny & Myers

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Siegels
  • Ninth Circuit
  • DC Comics Inc.
  • Warner Brothers Inc.
  • U.S. Court of Appeals

Key categories

    
  • Copyright

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Lawyers Sanctioned Over Porn Lawsuits File Appeal
    •      
  2. Court: Injured College Student Can't Sue State
    •         
      • Subscription Required
  3. It's Time For U.S. Courts To Consider Service Of Process By Social Media
    •      
  4. DeKalb Judge Dismisses, Then Recuses
    •      
  5. Lawyer Discipline: Cases Include Suspension, License Surrender
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

Hiring Interns? Be Sure to Do It Right

ACC Weighs in on Arizona's In-House Pro Bono Rules

Ex-Dewey Partners Face New Foe in Firm's Bankruptcy

S&C Adds Linklaters Restructuring Partner in London
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Enron Sandbox Stirs Up Private Data, Again

LegalTech West Coast Wraps Up With Ethics, VC News

In Tricky Prosecutions, Judges Play Peacemakers

Ropers Majeski Tries to Re-Invent Itself
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fla. Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Lawsuit Names Missing Fla. Attorney for Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Summer Programs Still in a Drought

Lawyer Not Covered for Alleged Malpractice at Prior Firm
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Firm Takes Another Hit in Bid for 'Unconscionable' Fees

New York's Martin Act Faces Test in Challenge to 2005 Case

Castille Testifies in Favor of 'Civil Gideon' Funding

Workers' Comp Judges Can't Fight Rescinded Raise
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Advising Clients on Weather and the Workplace
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Texas Sues BP, Others Over Deepwater Oil Spill Disaster
  •      
    • Subscription Required

'Follow That Escapee!'

Judge Who Tossed Defense Counsel Accused of 'Partiality'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • Contact Daily Report   |
  • Advertise with Us   |
  • Sitemap
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media