Warner Bros. Wins Legal Battle for Superman

[Black Lantern]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/warner-bros-wins-blockbuster-victory-410871

[Shaven Kev-migration]

Does this mean he gets his pants back?

[Davenport]

Does this mean he gets his pants back?

+1

[ComicConnoisseur]

I think we will see DC put much more importance back on the Superman franchise now.

It seems this battle has been going on for over a decade,and DC was holding back on Superman in fear that they would lose it all.

 

[WEBHEAD]

Maybe they can cancel the 52

 

 

 

 

 

and get back to the real continuity

[Davenport]

One can only hope.

 

[Shaven Kev-migration]

Cant he just fly counter clockwise around all 52 earths for the final infinite ultimate crisis aftermath that puts the world back the way it was before flash sharted while having a wet dream and ruined everything?

[esquirecomics]

As far as I am concerned, this was the proper moral and legal decision to have been rendered. And it demonstrates how sometimes overly aggressive lawyers and/or greed can make a situation worse.

 

The Siegel heirs should have abided by their 2001 agreement to settle the case as had been painstakingly negotiated. Instead, they suffered through ten years of stressful litigation to obtain little to nothing.

 

Fingers will and shall be pointed.

[Ares]

Fingers will and shall be pointed.

 

At Toberoff

[DiceX]

Fingers will and shall be pointed.

 

At Toberoff

 

At Greggy. Son of Jor El.

 

 

[esquirecomics]

Fingers will and shall be pointed.

 

At Toberoff

 

Absolutely

[Ares]

Fingers will and shall be pointed.

 

At Toberoff

 

Absolutely

 

From the stuff I read online it seems he was more concerned with gettign his peice of the pie than helping the families

[dem1138]

As far as I am concerned, this was the proper moral and legal decision to have been rendered. And it demonstrates how sometimes overly aggressive lawyers and/or greed can make a situation worse.

 

The Siegel heirs should have abided by their 2001 agreement to settle the case as had been painstakingly negotiated. Instead, they suffered through ten years of stressful litigation to obtain little to nothing.

 

Fingers will and shall be pointed.

 

So what were the terms of the 2001 agreement?

[esquirecomics]

As far as I am concerned, this was the proper moral and legal decision to have been rendered. And it demonstrates how sometimes overly aggressive lawyers and/or greed can make a situation worse.

 

The Siegel heirs should have abided by their 2001 agreement to settle the case as had been painstakingly negotiated. Instead, they suffered through ten years of stressful litigation to obtain little to nothing.

 

Fingers will and shall be pointed.

 

So what were the terms of the 2001 agreement?

 

I don't know the specifics off the top of my head, but my understanding was that it was quite fair. And obviously fair enough that the family agreed with the blessing of their then legal counsel.

[esquirecomics]

Fingers will and shall be pointed.

 

At Toberoff

 

Absolutely

 

From the stuff I read online it seems he was more concerned with gettign his peice of the pie than helping the families

 

As I recall from the file, part of his retainer agreement gave him 50% of the ownership rights. Therefore, he did not have an incentive to settle for anything less than he believed he deserved.

[zosocane]

The Ninth Circuit opinion reversing the District Court was only six pages long -- I was expecting to see something much longer. That's a very short opinion and makes it very clear that the 2001 agreement between DC and the Siegel widow should have been enforced by the trial court as a binding contract.

 

Glad to see this is over.