[Link] The “Superhero” Trademark: how the name of a genre came to be owned by DC and Marvel, and how they enforce it

by DG Stewart

Our publication has a category devoted to “superheroes”. It is a genre to which we have paid disproportionate attention, primarily because it is in English (the language of most of our contributors) and because of the sheer volume of superhero-genre material generated primarily by American publishers.

But what does the word “superhero” actually denote? The words “super hero” was first used in 1917, when it was used to describe a “public figure of great accomplishments”

In so far as use of the word “superhero” in the course of commerce is concerned, however, there is a severe limitation. The word “superhero” is jointly owned in many parts of the world by two US publishers, DC Comics and Marvel Characters Inc, an affiliate of Marvel Comics. The road to joint ownership of the word “SUPERHERO” in the United States is well-explained in this link.

But perhaps a more concise explanation comes from both DC Comics and Marvel themselves. The following paragraphs come from a United States trade mark notice of opposition filed by DC Comics and Marvel in May 2015:

Read the full article: http://www.worldcomicbookreview.com/index.php/2017/06/01/superhero-trademark-name-genre-came-owned-dc-marvel-enforce/

Steeger Properties, LLC, Acquires the Copyrights to Popular Publications’ Pulp Magazines

Boston, MA: October 21, 2014—Steeger Properties, LLC has added to a growing collection of pulp fiction magazines by acquiring the copyrights to nearly 150 pulp magazine titles that were originally published by Popular Publications, Inc. Now claiming ownership to most of the pulp stories and characters published by both Popular Publications and The Frank A. Munsey Company, Steeger Properties, LLC, has accrued the copyrights to an estimated 6,000 issues and 30,000 stories.

“We’re proud to represent these thousands of stories and plan on introducing them to a whole new audience in as many mediums as possible,” said Matthew Moring, Manager of Steeger Properties, LLC, and Publisher of Altus Press.

Pulp fiction began in 1896 with Frank A. Munsey’s The Argosy Magazine. The 192-page magazine had untrimmed edges and the stories within the pages offered entertaining genre fiction ranging from adventure and mysteries to science fiction and westerns and everything in between. In six years, the magazine went from publishing a few thousand copies per month, to well over half a million copies. Argosy’s success was partially thanks to the variety of recurring characters it published, such as Tarzan and Zorro. Popular Publications, Inc.—the most successful pulp magazine publisher of its time—published such well-known authors as Raymond Chandler, Ray Bradbury and Erle Stanley Gardner within the pages of its own titles. In 1942, Popular Publications acquired The Frank A. Munsey Company.

Fast forward to 2014. While the popularity of pulp fiction has fluctuated over the years, the stories within the pages are classic fiction and are as influential to American pop culture as ever. They are fast paced, well-written short stories and novels featuring classic characters. There’s a huge audience that hasn’t had contact with these stories. By reintroducing them using today’s technology, these classic hard-boiled detective, mystery, western, and science fiction stories will be available for generations to come.

The Steeger Properties, LLC, catalog is available for licensing in all media.

About Steeger Properties, LLC
Steeger Properties, LLC, has accrued the copyrights to 30,000 pulp fiction stories and has plans to share its collection with a whole new audience. For more information, please visit www.steegerproperties.com and/or email Matthew Moring at steegerproperties@gmail.com.

[Link] Arthur Conan Doyle Estate Now Being Sued to Settle Whether Sherlock Holmes is in the Public Domain

by Nate Hoffelder

I have long argued that copyright law has grown far out of proportion and no longer serves the needs of the creators, so I was pleased to read this week about a recently filed lawsuit that could prune back some of the overgrowth.

The noted Sherlockian scholar, Baker Street Irregular and prominent attorney Leslie Klinger, editor of The New Annotated Sherlock Holmes, The Sherlock Holmes Reference Library and The Grand Game: A Celebration of Sherlockian Scholarship, to name a few, has filed a civil lawsuit against the Conan Doyle Estate to determine that the characters of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson are in fact in the public domain.

Mr Klinger is suing (according to the press release) because of the pressure that the Conan Doyle estate applied against Mr Klinger’s latest anthology of Sherlock Holmes inspired stories.

In the Company of Sherlock Holmes was supposed to be published by Pegasus Books and included Holmes stories by numerous well-known mystery/sci-fi/fantasy authors.  The anthology is on hold because the Conan Doyle estate contacted the publisher, asked for a fee, and threatened to block distribution of the anthology if the fee was not paid.

The Conan Dolye’s justification for their legal shakedown is at best questionable and is based on a not-entirely settled point of copyright law. Allow me to explain.

As you probably know, the vast majority of the Holmes stories are old enough that they are no longer in copyright in the US. (The author died in 1930, so his entire body work is public domain everywhere but the US.) In the US you can legally download nearly any of the Holmes stories from sites like Project Gutenberg. If you wanted to, you could then format the stories as ebooks or bind them into a paper book and sell the stories. This is completely legal.

Continue reading: http://www.the-digital-reader.com/2013/02/16/arthur-conan-doyle-estate-now-being-sued-to-settle-whether-sherlock-holmes-is-in-the-public-domain#.USGCvPKjKt1

[Link] DC Comics Keeps The Rights To Superman

Yes, this image of Superman is in the public
domain. From http://commons.wikimedia.org/

DC Comics will retain its rights to Superman after a judge ruled Wednesday that the heirs of one of the superhero’s co-creators signed away their ability to reclaim copyrights to the Man of Steel roughly 20 years ago.

The ruling means that DC Comics and its owner Warner Bros. will retain all rights to continue using the character in books, films, television and other mediums, including a the film reboot planned for next year.

DC Comics sued the heirs of artist Joe Shuster in 2010, seeking a ruling that they lost their ability to try to reclaim the superhero’s copyrights in 1992. U.S. District Court Judge Otis Wright II agreed, stating that Shuster’s sister and brother relinquished any chance to reclaim Superman copyrights in exchange for annual pension payments from DC Comics.

Continue reading: http://comics-x-aminer.com/2012/10/18/dc-comics-keeps-the-rights-to-superman/

Yes, this image of Superman is in the public
domain. From http://commons.wikimedia.org/

The Writer Will Take Your Questions Now (#110) -- Character Ownership

Do you own the complete rights to characters you create or are they shared with the publishers?

 The short answer is... yes, but only for some.

The long answer is...

I actually enjoy writing my own characters AND writing for hire for characters other people own the rights too.

The benefits for owning my own characters are that if the miracle of getting it optioned for a film or video game or t-shirt logo or _______________ (fill in the blank with miraculous shot in a million happening) occurs, I can make the cash without having to have my share split or filtered through some company who jointly or wholly owns my work. But the main benefit of owning the copyrights of my characters is that I have editorial control and artistic control over the vision and "purity" of the work. To put it in a more current understanding, you won't see a "Before Rick Ruby" or "Before Fishnet Angel" comic book series made without mine and Bobby's blessing and legal approval. (But we're open to it. Please send large checks to me and Bobby at our currently addresses. Well, what are you waiting for? I don't see any big checks in my mailbox yet.)

The benefits of writing doing work for hire with characters I can't own (even if I create them) is that I get paid up front, and I get paid better because one of the things the publisher is buy from me is the rights to all the stuff in my brain as it relates to their characters and stories. Another benefit, and this may seem to fly in the face of what I just wrote in the previous paragraph, is that I get editorial guidance for the work. I don't have to sweat the small stuff or the plots and limitations because I have someone else to stress out about those on my behalf. But if and when a Gene Simmons Dominatrix movie is made, Mr. Simmons wouldn't owe me a dime, even if it is based completely on the scripts I wrote for him and IDW. I gave that right away and I did so willingly. I would hope, however, that somewhere in the credits I'd get a mention that said "Based on a story by Sean Taylor" though.

This question comes from the wonderful "Table Talk" column at the New Pulp website, which you should all be reading. 

[Link] Supreme Court Says Congress May Re-Copyright Public Domain Works

Congress may take books, musical compositions and other works out of the public domain, where they can be freely used and adapted, and grant them copyright status again, the Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.

In a 6-2 ruling, the court said that, just because material enters the public domain, it is not “territory that works may never exit.” (.pdf)

The top court was ruling on a petition by a group of orchestra conductors, educators, performers, publishers and film archivists who urged the justices to reverse an appellate court that ruled against the group, which has relied on artistic works in the public domain for their livelihoods.

They claimed that re-copyrighting public works would breach the speech rights of those who are now using those works without needing a license. There are millions of decades-old works at issue. Some of the well-known ones include H.G. Wells’ Things to Come; Fritz Lang’s Metropolis and the musical compositions of Igor Fyodorovich Stravinsky.

Continue reading at: http://m.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/01/scotus-re-copyright-decision/

[Link] Obama Says So Long SOPA, Killing Controversial Internet Piracy Legislation

The growing anti-SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) support that has swept through the gaming and Internet community found a very big ally today. With websites like Reddit and Wikipedia and gaming organizations like Major League Gaming prepared for a blackout on January 18th – the same day that the House Judiciary Committee hearing on HR 3261was scheduled in Washington, DC – President Barack Obama has stepped in and said he would not support the bill. SOPA has been killed, for now.

Much to the chagrin of Hollywood, the Entertainment Software Association (which has been a backer of the bill from early on), and Internet domain company GoDaddy.com (which lost many accounts as a result of its support for the bill); SOPA has been shelved. The Motion Picture Association of America, one of the bill’s largest sponsors, is expected to regroup.

To continue reading: http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngaudiosi/2012/01/16/obama-says-so-long-sopa-killing-controversial-internet-piracy-legislation/