Superman in the Public Domain Discussion Thread

[Ascended]

Many if not most of those adaptations have been bad or mediocre. Superman being public domain doesn't mean he'll have more good movies and tv shows. It just means he'll have more adaptations, half of which are likely to be bad.

Probably more than half, honestly. But the stuff that's good? That stuff will be better than 95% of anything DC ever published.

I can see Marvel and DC having an unofficial agreement not to use each other's characters

Besides, Marvel using Superman would be a kind of moral victory for DC that their character is so big that even the competition rushed to use him the first chance they got...

Slightly off-topic, but Captain America would be another interesting case. Like, would the public domain version have to be set in WW2 because Marvel would still have the copyright on the version who made it to the present-day? Could a public domain version of Bucky grow up?

I expect DC and Marvel to keep their hands off each other's toys, if and when they begin to hit the domain.

With Cap, my limited and likely flawed understanding is that he could be in the present day. Being set in modern times is too broad and vague a concept for copyright to lock down. Copyright protects specific stories, not general concepts. But how Steve gets to the present day, that story (from the 60's I guess?) would be protected and DC couldn't have him frozen in ice for decades. They'd have to throw him into the future via time machine, or just have him live a really long life or something.

And yes Bucky could grow up. That, again, is too vague and broad a concept for copyright to cover (again, assuming my limited knowledge of copyright law is correct). You couldn't do the Winter Soldier stuff of course, but Bucky could grow up.

[Filbert]

In almost eleven years, the first six or so issues of Action Comics will become public domain. That will mean anybody can show or reproduce them, as long as they are not identifiable as DC property (e.g. containing the Superman logo or S-shield.) Elements from those issues will be available for use as well.
But DC has more resources than the Doyle Estate, which until this year has just sued anybody even thinking of adapting Sherlock Holmes without their permission. DC will ruin you.
If they don't ruin themselves first.

[bat39]

In almost eleven years, the first six or so issues of Action Comics will become public domain. That will mean anybody can show or reproduce them, as long as they are not identifiable as DC property (e.g. containing the Superman logo or S-shield.) Elements from those issues will be available for use as well.
But DC has more resources than the Doyle Estate, which until this year has just sued anybody even thinking of adapting Sherlock Holmes without their permission. DC will ruin you.
If they don't ruin themselves first.

The Doyle estate hasn't really succeeded in doing much though. The one edge they had was that they continued to own the copyright on a few final Sherlock Holmes stories in the US. They claimed that any depiction of Holmes as a more humane and compassionate man violated the copyright on these stories, which was the basis of their suit against Netflix for Enola Holmes. I don't think that case went anywhere though. But apparently, this situation is the reason why adaptations of Sherlock Holmes have tended to emphasize the character's abrasiveness and seemingly 'unemotional' nature.

You can read more about it here - https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...lving-emotions

But you can see DC doing a hell of a lot more to defend their remaining Superman copyright since, unlike the Doyle estate, there are literally billions of dollars at stake, and they've got decades worth of material that'll still be under copyright for a long time. Superman marries Lois in a public domain work? Lawsuit. Superman wears something close to the trademarked S-shield? Lawsuit. Superman has a base that resembles the Fortress of Solitude? Lawsuit. Superman fights a green-skinned alien invader? Lawsuit. Superman fights an evil duplicate? Lawsuit. And so on. They won't win all of these, but they sure will try.

[DochaDocha]

If you're right and the big budget blockbuster is dying, then it doesn't matter anyway. And WB will still rule the big movie scene regardless, they've got the money to invest in that sorta thing the rest of us don't. Let 'em keep it, and their bloated Hollywood budgets. I'm not looking at domain Clark and expecting some massive cgi spectacle of a movie, I'm looking at it and expecting novels, comics, streaming, all of it on a smaller budget than what WB might put into a big movie, but OG Clark doesn't require a ton of cash to pull off anyway.

Just to clarify, I don't think the mega-budget superhero blockbuster is going away any time soon. I think the mega-budget SUPERMAN blockbuster has a shrinking window. Hope this is another thing I'm wrong about.

[Ascended]

Superman marries Lois in a public domain work? Lawsuit. Superman wears something close to the trademarked S-shield? Lawsuit. Superman has a base that resembles the Fortress of Solitude? Lawsuit. Superman fights a green-skinned alien invader? Lawsuit. Superman fights an evil duplicate? Lawsuit. And so on. They won't win all of these, but they sure will try.

DC will sue, yes, but they'll do so knowing that they'll lose most of the time if it makes it as far as a judge. These guys know they probably won't win the court case, they're just trying to intimidate creators and rack up enough legal fees that people give up. But as long as you're not stepping on material still under copyright and you're not using a trademarked image or phrase, I don't think there is much they can actually do to stop you. That's the whole point of the public domain. You just gotta be careful and do your homework.

We're also discounting whatever public opinion may say on the topic too. One of the major reasons why experts don't expect much challenge to current copyright law is because extending it again is so damn unpopular. The theory is that guys like Disney worry that a big lobbying attempt will alienate and push customers away, costing them money and causing a PR shitstorm and it simply isn't worth the hassle.

Assuming public opinion and legal precedent remains the same in ten years (not at all certain, given SCTOUS), it might be wiser for groups like WB to just let the domain stuff happen without comment or interference. Those domain projects aren't likely to ever be big/popular enough to challenge the revenue stream so there's not really anything to gain, but potentially plenty to lose if things go viral and you get painted as the big bad villain stomping on the dreams of the little guy.

Just look at it like this. Did Disney lose any money because Blood and Honey was made? No, of course not. But because Disney threw a fit about it and tried to stop it, the film got more headlines than it otherwise would have. Disney lost nothing, but Blood and Honey got free press and more advertising and likely made more money. Doesn't make much sense for Disney to keep litigating the issue, if all it does is make you look bad, help your competition, and potentially piss off your customers.

[All Star Superman]

I still very much doubt Superman will enter the public domain. I'm old enough to know, not just believe, that mega corporations and their political pals can get anything done, no matter the law and no matter the cost. WB/DC will find a way to keep enough out of public domain to make it virtually pointless to attempt anything with the character. Until or unless they sell Superman to a company that actually loves and understands the character, Superman is done. Same goes for most DC characters at this point.

[Agent Z]

Probably more than half, honestly. But the stuff that's good? That stuff will be better than 95% of anything DC ever published.

Doesn't seem like much of an improvement to me. We'll still be in a world where most Superman stuff is bad if what you say is true. In fact, I'd argue that most of the good Superman content will come from Warner Bros, who for all their flaws have shown they can make good Superman adaptations.

[manwhohaseverything]

Doesn't seem like much of an improvement to me. We'll still be in a world where most Superman stuff is bad if what you say is true. In fact, I'd argue that most of the good Superman content will come from Warner Bros, who for all their flaws have shown they can make good Superman adaptations.

The difference is people would get a variety of choices instead of the same **** over and over and over again.if wb's superman is not of your taste.no matter how good it is,it won't matter to you.I can read "all star superman" and go "paternalistic savior shlock."You can say that's not "true" and have an argument with me for 5 pages..And i would still think that.. Because superman as presented in the story doesn't appear to me like it does to you.we are different people with different temperaments,history..etc

or

i can go "superman is a fish out of water saved and taken in by jimmy upon crash landing on earth?hmm.. interesting".


Also,wb doesn't have much of a track record with superman where they absolutely scored to begin with.They make great batman content..Superman?not so much.Superman franchise was healthier character when they licensed the character out for studios to make content is my opinion..

[Ascended]

Doesn't seem like much of an improvement to me. We'll still be in a world where most Superman stuff is bad if what you say is true. In fact, I'd argue that most of the good Superman content will come from Warner Bros, who for all their flaws have shown they can make good Superman adaptations.

It's not about raising the bar of quality overall, you're gonna get good and bad stories no matter how many people or companies are working on them. It's about getting a wider variety, stories that DC wouldn't tell by people DC wouldn't hire.

Our fellow poster JAK has talked about making a low-budget Golden Age Supes movie. That's not something WB is likely to ever make, they want the big spectacle of a massive summer blockbuster. Maybe JAK's movie would be awful, or maybe it'd be amazing. But either way, without Clark in the domain we'll never see it to know.

Yeah, WB has made good Superman adaptations. They've also made a lot of bad ones. We haven't trusted this company with the character in decades, why would anyone think it's best to keep him solely under the control of a company where leadership has publicly said they don't get or like the character? We post here, we see great ideas dropped every day, what benefit is there keeping Clark out of our hands, and in the hands of a company that has actively and intentionally abused him?

[Zero Hunter]

Think of the beloved fictional characters who went public domain, Dracula, Frankenstein, Mad Hatter, Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde and all the good books, shows, movies and exedra with them in it because they are public domain.

I bet Superman would get much of the same respect when he is for everyone as they are now.

The big difference to me is Superman has never gone out of circulation or stopped having new material. DC has been publishing and adding to the mythos for decades and still is today. To me characters that have never really gone away longer than a few years like comic characters should not fall under the same public domain laws as characters from books.

[Zero Hunter]

The difference is people would get a variety of choices instead of the same **** over and over and over again.if wb's superman is not of your taste.no matter how good it is,it won't matter to you.I can read "all star superman" and go "paternalistic savior shlock."You can say that's not "true" and have an argument with me for 5 pages..And i would still think that.. Because superman as presented in the story doesn't appear to me like it does to you.we are different people with different temperaments,history..etc

or

i can go "superman is a fish out of water saved and taken in by jimmy upon crash landing on earth?hmm.. interesting".


Also,wb doesn't have much of a track record with superman where they absolutely scored to begin with.They make great batman content..Superman?not so much.Superman franchise was healthier character when they licensed the character out for studios to make content is my opinion..

Yeah but Dc has spent decades building up the brand. If suddenly there are 4 or 5 cheap knock off Superman movies and they all suck that will hurt the overall brand. Why should a company that has spent the time time and effort building up something now have to compete with people who have never put anything into building the property up to begin with.

[Ascended]

Yeah but Dc has spent decades building up the brand. If suddenly there are 4 or 5 cheap knock off Superman movies and they all suck that will hurt the overall brand. Why should a company that has spent the time time and effort building up something now have to compete with people who have never put anything into building the property up to begin with.

Are you really worried about third parties doing more damage to the brand than WB/DC already do? The last time Supes had a big successful movie was what, more than forty years ago? The last time he had a great, successful video game was....never. Last cartoon series was thirty years ago or so (with one on the way, finally). He does seem to get a live action tv show after every decade off the air, and those have been relatively successful, at least by the metrics of their host network.

What were the efforts we did get? Snyder's films where the plan was for Batman and Lois to have a kid and for Superman to be the end boss battle of a full Darkseid trilogy. We didn't get that far thankfully but we did get far enough for Batman to steal Clark's sequel out from under him. Before that, Returns; a toothless nostalgia wank where Clark barely won a fight against a rock and was pretty creepy with the baby mama he abandoned without a word right after knocking her up. In games? Injustice, the bloodthirsty tyrant. Oh, and we can't forget the upcoming Kill the Justice League game where, once again, Clark's the bad guy.

Let's look at comics. They put a sexual predator in control of the office because the Super office was DC's version of exile. They wouldn't put high-end talent on the books if they could avoid it. They cut down the number of solo books from five to two (one actually, for a while). Both WB and DC leadership have publicly admitted to not liking and/or understanding the character, and he's seen as outdated and broken by them.

This is protecting the brand? These are the hands Clark is best left in? What is a third party/fan project gonna do that DC hasn't already done?

[Gaastra]

Steamboat Willie hits public domain in '24 so Disney has until this December to lobby congress.

Yup and it will join the other two mickey shorts that went in public domain in the 80s! Funny how people are "uh-no mickey cartoon heading to pd" when he has had shorts there for decades along with bugs bunny, casper, daffy duck, popeye, betty boop, mighty mouse, porky pig and yes--superman!

From what I see the cartoon in pd means you can release that cartoon on dvd (beware some music may still be protected! Why the looney tunes song is cut out of the start of some pd tapes!)) but books go into pd anyone can make new stuff from the book version.

Otherwise, we would have had new superman cartoons from the pd superman shorts by now!

[the illustrious mr. kenway]

I'm hoping we get something like this.

[Ascended]

Yup and it will join the other two mickey shorts that went in public domain in the 80s! Funny how people are "uh-no mickey cartoon heading to pd" when he has had shorts there for decades along with bugs bunny, casper, daffy duck, popeye, betty boop, mighty mouse, porky pig and yes--superman!

From what I see the cartoon in pd means you can release that cartoon on dvd (beware some music may still be protected! Why the looney tunes song is cut out of the start of some pd tapes!)) but books go into pd anyone can make new stuff from the book version.

Otherwise, we would have had new superman cartoons from the pd superman shorts by now!

Gave it a quick Google and I can't find anything that supports this. What shorts are already in the domain?

You may be looking at distribution rights or something? A lot of third parties end up distributing old content, but that doesn't make it public domain.