The iconic superhero, Superman, is about to take flight into a new era of cinematic adventures, but before we lift off, a storm is brewing in the world of comic book copyrights. The estate of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel is taking a bold stand against DC Comics and Warner Bros., claiming that the companies have failed to properly register and protect the character’s foreign copyrights. This timely lawsuit comes on the heels of James Gunn’s highly anticipated reboot, which promises to breathe new life into the Man of Steel’s legendary story. As the world awaits the dramatic reimagining of this beloved character, the question on everyone’s mind is: what does this mean for the future of Superman’s cinematic adventures? Dive into the world of comic book copyright disputes and find out how this battle may impact the fate of the iconic superhero.
Superman’s Copyright Dispute Revived: What’s at Stake
Background on the Long-Running Dispute

The Shuster estate’s attempts to reclaim Superman’s rights have been ongoing for several decades, with the most recent lawsuit being filed in the Southern District of New York. The dispute dates back to 1938 when Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster sold the rights to Superman for $130. Since then, the heirs of both creators have sought to reclaim the rights, with the Shuster estate being the most persistent in their efforts.
In 2013, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal rejected the Shuster estate’s attempt to cancel the Superman copyright, finding that Shuster’s sister had signed away his termination right after his death in 1992. However, the estate’s attorney, Marc Toberoff, argues that the previous litigation was limited to termination rights under the U.S. Copyright Act, and does not affect the estate’s overseas copyrights.

Previous Legal Battles and Outcomes
The Shuster estate has been involved in several legal battles over the years to reclaim Superman’s rights. In 2010, DC Comics sued Toberoff, accusing him of seeking to enrich himself by wrongfully working with the creators’ estates to try to wrest control of Superman. The company ultimately prevailed in a 2-1 ruling at the 9th Circuit.
Toberoff has been involved in the efforts to reclaim Superman’s rights since 2001 and has argued that the previous litigation only addressed U.S. copyright law and did not affect overseas rights. The suit states that under the copyright laws in the U.K. and the other countries at issue, the rights to Superman automatically reverted to the estates 25 years after the creators’ deaths.
New Lawsuit Filed: What’s Changed
The new lawsuit filed by the Shuster estate asserts claims under copyright laws in the U.K., Canada, Ireland, and Australia. The suit comes months before Warner Bros. Discovery will release “Superman” this summer, relaunching the valuable franchise and starting a planned cinematic universe of DC characters.
In the suit, filed in the Southern District of New York, Toberoff argues that the copyright reverted to the Shuster estate in most of those countries in 2017, and in Canada in 2021. The suit seeks an order blocking Warner Bros. from distributing “Superman” in the U.K. and other disputed territories without first obtaining a license from the estate.
- The Berne Convention, an international treaty which the U.S. joined in 1988, plays a key role in the dispute. The convention requires countries to recognize and enforce each other’s copyrights.
- The U.S. District Court has jurisdiction over the dispute in part due to the Berne Convention.
The Stakes: Who Owns Superman’s Rights?
The Original Sale and Transfer of Rights
Shuster and Siegel created Superman and sold the rights for $130 in 1938. Siegel died in 1996; the heirs of both creators have sought to reclaim the rights since then. Toberoff has been involved in those efforts since 2001.
The Shuster estate’s argument is that the rights to Superman automatically reverted to the estate 25 years after the creators’ deaths. This means that the estate now owns the rights to Superman in the U.K., Canada, Ireland, and Australia.
The Shuster Estate’s Arguments
The Shuster estate claims that the previous litigation only addressed U.S. copyright law and did not affect overseas rights. Toberoff argues that the U.S. District Court has jurisdiction over the dispute in part due to the Berne Convention.
- The Berne Convention requires countries to recognize and enforce each other’s copyrights.
- The U.S. District Court has jurisdiction over the dispute in part due to the Berne Convention.
Warner Bros.’ Response: “We Will Vigorously Defend Our Rights”
Warner Bros., which owns DC, said it will fight in court. “We fundamentally disagree with the merits of the lawsuit, and will vigorously defend our rights,” the spokesperson said.
What’s Next: The Future of Superman’s Copyright
The Legal Battle Ahead
The lawsuit will play out in court, with the Shuster estate seeking to invalidate the companies’ copyrights in several foreign markets. The outcome of the lawsuit will have significant implications for Warner Bros. and DC Comics.
The Berne Convention and international treaty laws will play a key role in the dispute. The U.S. District Court has jurisdiction over the dispute in part due to the Berne Convention.
Implications for Fans and the Superman Franchise
The outcome of the lawsuit might affect the Superman franchise and its fans. If the Shuster estate prevails, it could lead to changes in the franchise’s direction and creative decisions.
The lawsuit is not intended to deprive fans of their next Superman, but rather seeks just compensation for Joe Shuster’s fundamental contributions as the co-creator of Superman.
The Legacy of Superman’s Creators
The importance of recognizing the contributions of Siegel and Shuster to the Superman franchise cannot be overstated. The lawsuit is a reminder of the complex and often contentious history of the franchise.
The legacy of Superman’s creators will continue to be a topic of debate and discussion in the coming months and years.
Conclusion
As the Superman franchise gears up for a reboot under James Gunn’s direction, the estate of its iconic creator, Jerry Siegel, has launched a lawsuit against DC and Warner Bros. over foreign copyrights. The suit, which seeks to reclaim ownership of Superman’s intellectual property abroad, highlights the complex and often contentious relationship between creators and studios. At its core, the dispute centers on the question of who owns the rights to Superman’s character, with the Siegel estate arguing that it was unfairly swindled out of its rightful share.
The implications of this lawsuit are far-reaching, with the potential to reshape the way creators and studios navigate intellectual property agreements. As the entertainment industry continues to globalize, the battle for control over beloved characters will only intensify. With the James Gunn reboot on the horizon, this legal showdown threatens to upend the very fabric of the Superman franchise, leaving fans and industry insiders alike eagerly awaiting the outcome. As the dust settles, one thing is clear: the creators of Superman’s iconic character will stop at nothing to reclaim their rightful place in the spotlight.