Posted in: Recent Updates | Tagged:

Warner Bros Play The Man, Not The Ball (UPDATE)

It appears that, in an attempt not to lose the rights to the Superman character in three years time, Warner Bros are to sue lawyer Marc Toberoff.  The same lawyer who has been successfully championing the case against Warber for the estate of Joe Siegel.

Nikki Finke reports that "This morning, Warner Bros' new outside counsel is filing a lawsuit against Toberoff raising questions about his role as a financial participant in the Superman rights and not as the attorney for the Shuster and Siegel families fighting their Superman cases. The purpose of the lawsuit is to put Toberoff in a position where he may have to resign as the Siegel and Shuster attorney altogether."

The case involved mysterious documents that might allege some financial impropriety on behalf of Toberoff – but this raises further questions as to how exactly those documents arrived.

And in an ironic twist, the lawyer hired by Warner to do this deed, Daniel Petrocelli, managed to get a case against Disney over Winnie The Pooh rights overturned stating that it was partially based on evidence that was stolen from garbage on the Disney lot.

Finke promises more – but this does feel a rather shitty move on Warners part. Still, all is fair in love, war, a copyright claims to fictional characters dating back over seventy years.

Of course this is just the kind of move that won't exactly sit well with the fanbase. The question should be asked of Warner Bros, What Would Superman Do?

UPDATE: Here's the complaint.

Anyway, the main allegation is that Marc Toberoff is set to gain an amount of ownership of Superman if the case is successful. And it's that interest that, apparently, might be illegal. But its all phrased in that kind of language that couples use when they're arguing but don't want to raise their voices but have to make a point. In this case  they can't even bring themselves to even suggest Toberoff may have a case. Like this:

See, it's a scheme to violate the law. It later talks about his web of collusive agreements, that Toberoff would have prevented the estates from dealing with DC over Superman, repudiating existing agreements, painting a conspiracy on Toberoff's to gain a majority share in the ownership of Superman and basically twiddling a long black moustache when going "mwah ha ha ha ha…"

There's also a bit that states that Siegel, Shuster and their families "enjoyed lifetime compensation and other benefits". Well, is that true? Towards the end, yes a sum of $20,000 a year, increased later for the families, but hardly comensurate to their contribution. It also seems to suggest that Siegel and Schuster didn't try to regain rights during their lifetimes. Apart from the number of times they sued National/DC of course.

Warner Bros may indeed have a point. But just reading the document, it comes over as the sourest of grapes.

Enjoyed this? Please share on social media!

Stay up-to-date and support the site by following Bleeding Cool on Google News today!