http://www.awn.com/news/business/sup...c-comics-slapp

Text:
yeah this slimy lawyer (redundant?) has his fingers in the pie all right.....
dirtbag.

One way or another, there's shenanigans going on.

I have to wonder, what is the point of Siegel and Shuster getting the rights to Superman if their lawyer is going to get half of those rights anyway? For that reason, I'd initially disregard the report, except that rather than Toberoff trying to dispute the claim and make any attempt to say that DC isn't telling the truth, he says the documents revealing the shenanigans were stolen.

Which I'm inclined to interpret as an indicator that it's all true, but the lawyer thinks that it shouldn't matter since DC technically shouldn't know about it anyway. Though legal matters of how it was learned aside, I think it's probably for the best when something like this come to light.

Absolutely not. There are exceptions, but more often than not it's a redundant phrase.

How is this right? Some lawyer gets the controlling rights to Superman? The heirs are better off leaving him with DC, they'll treat the property with reverence at least.

After what DC did to Captain Marvel it's all just karma coming around to bite them in the ###.

While it would be preferable that the heirs had a higher percentage (and together they still have controlling stake), the point is, it's THEIR rights to assign as they want. Personally, I'd like to see the rights expire and go into public domain where they belong (along with a certain Mouse), but barring that they should rightfully rest with the creator's family. DC's made (and continues to make) huge amounts of money off of other's creations. For a company that's taking to championing creator's rights in recent years, they need to put their money where their mouth is on this one.

In the end I can't imagine Superman anywhere but DC due to Trademarking, etc., so this will really amount to a licensing deal where S&S (and the lawyer) will get a cut of Superman profits.