Worlds Finest?

[Gangbuster]

This is going to get tricky.  

-First of all, WB is releasing the Superboy TV series this summer. Will the Siegels get money from that DVD release, or will WB argue that the tv show was made before the Siegels got those rights?

-Is Maggin getting money from the use of Superboy Prime, or even credit? Probably not.

- Clark has rarely been referred to as "Superboy" in Smallville, but the times that he has have been since 2004. I hope they win this suit, because the stakes are this:

If any Clark Kent is legally considered Superboy, then there is no point in a Superman origin that doesn't include him. But if Superboy and Clark Kent are separate characters, then DC will be encouraged to continue the separation and eliminate Superboys.

I think they have a good case: Smallville, Lana Lang, etc. were introduced in Superboy comics. Fortunately for the Siegels, the Byrne era excluded Lex from Smallville, meaning that the appearance of Lex in Smallville is a "Superboy" characteristic.

[binarysunrise]

Is Maggin getting money from the use of Superboy Prime

This just confuses things.  I believe Maggin's creation falls under the "work for hire" category, so he got paid to make a comic, and doesn't have rights to the future use of the character.  But as Siegels have the rights to Superboy, I believe they have the rights to Superboy Prime.

From what I remember, back in the 40s they ruled that Superboy and Superman were two separate creations, and that Superboy infringed on Siegel's creation.  From that line of reasoning, anything derivative of Superboy (Superboy Prime, the Conner Superboy, etc.) also should be in their hands now.

Lana, Lex, and other characters that were later created in the Superboy series are separate issues, and the Siegels don't have rights to them.  However, the jury may use them as contextual evidence to decide that Smallville is truly about Superboy.

Regarding the future of things, and the Superboy DVD, I believe the Siegels have the rights to any use of Superboy.  If we were to date it as anything created post-2004, that would mean you would have in a sense two copywrites, with DC allowed to publish Superboy archives and such.  I think they have the entire rights, but since most of the Superboy $ is in Smallville, they are focusing there first. Once that is decided I think what needs to happen next is either selling the rights back to DC...again...or arguing over percentage of back/future profits.

[nightwing]

This is going to get tricky.

 Smallville, Lana Lang, etc. were introduced in Superboy comics. Fortunately for the Siegels, the Byrne era excluded Lex from Smallville, meaning that the appearance of Lex in Smallville is a "Superboy" characteristic.

Tricky indeed.

None of those things were created by Jerry Seigel, were they?  I thought Lana, Pete and even the name "Smallville" were all the work of later writers.  Jerry did come up with the name "Superboy" and made a pitch to DC based on it (by all accounts a pitch utterly different from anything DC ever printed) but I can't imagine how that would give him the rights to every character or concept that ever appeared in a DC book with the name "Superboy" on it.

I think the Seigels and DC will forever be locked in a death grip over Superboy and Superman.  The Seigels have the lead character, which is a lot in terms of merchandising but not much if you want to put out comics with the familiar supporting cast.  DC owns (so far) everything that makes Superman interesting and familiar outside of his costume and powers...the Planet, Lois, Jimmy, Perry, Lex, etc.  Neither side is going to accomplish much without the other.

I don't know much about law, but it seems to me the Seigels don't even have the rights to "Clark Kent" as a creation, since he pre-dates the Superboy concept.  And considering it took them 50 years to win rights to Superboy, I don't think any of us will live long enough to see them win rights to every other facet of the mythos, case by case.

[nightwing]

Whoops, sorry...looks like binarysunrise covered some of the same things I did, only before me.  But he also said this:

Lana, Lex, and other characters that were later created in the Superboy series are separate issues, and the Siegels don't have rights to them. However, the jury may use them as contextual evidence to decide that Smallville is truly about Superboy.

Maybe.  But I think you could turn that argument on its ear.  A side-by-side analysis comparing Silver Age Superboy and the Smallville show (both featuring Lana, Lex, Pete, etc) to Jerry's proposal (which had none of those and featured a bratty prankster Superboy) could convince a jury that DC's Superboy is another creature altogether from Seigel's, and no more a "rip-off" of his "property" than Marvel's "Captain Marvel" is a theft from the Fawcett original.

In other words, if Lana, Pete and Lex are your litmus test, then Jerry's creation wasn't "truly about Superboy" either.