Why we aren't getting really good superman stories

[magha_regulus]

Superman has been around long enough to be in the public domain (as the public domain was originally conceived). Because the rights to the character are being held by a massive corporation, there are possibly tousands of really great superman stories that will never see the light of day, stories that could be told in any medium imaginable.

What do folks think? Does the public deserve to have a public domain Superman?

[Coal Tiger]

I'm not terribly interested in reading Superman fanfic, though nothing is stopping people from writing it.

[superduperman]

I think the bigger problem is, it's just harder to break into the industry than it used to be. It's become kind of an old boys club. So you end up with the same people working on the same characters for twenty years re-hashing the same ideas over and over again. I think if they opened the door a little wider to let some new guys (and girls) in, we might start to see some new ideas. I kind of doubt that Yang wanted to be working on an underpowered Superman, that was just what editorial handed down to him. A character is only as good as the people working on them allow them to be. I have plenty of ideas I'd like to try with Superman but posting some fan-fic on the internet probably isn't going to get me anywhere. Both the big two need to be more open to fresh talent. It's not coincidence that companies like Image are where everyone wants to go now.

[Kuwagaton]

Public domain sounds like a great idea. I'd love to see tons of other people handle Superman and not worry about pressure from the higher ups.

[HsssH]

I don't really think that much would change if Superman went public domain, every year we get bunch of new Superman clones that are same concept with slight alterations to avoid lawsuits.

[Carabas]

I just think that Superman works a lot better as a character when he isn't part of a shared universe. Which is why all those Elseworld stories and indepndant copycat versions are often so enjoyable.

[Jon Clark]

I just think that Superman works a lot better as a character when he isn't part of a shared universe. Which is why all those Elseworld stories and indepndant copycat versions are often so enjoyable.

It might also be that no one has to worry about leaving the characters in usable condition when they are done. Their Superman can be dead, depowered, an outcast, ruler of the world. He can alter society to a point where nothing is recognizable. No one has to worry when the story ends what comes next month or next issue.

[Trey Strain]

Mickey Mouse was supposed to pass into the public domain in 2003, but as you can see, he hasn't. Money talks.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...y-do-it-again/

[The Dork Knight]

I just think that Superman works a lot better as a character when he isn't part of a shared universe. Which is why all those Elseworld stories and indepndant copycat versions are often so enjoyable.

It might also be that no one has to worry about leaving the characters in usable condition when they are done. Their Superman can be dead, depowered, an outcast, ruler of the world. He can alter society to a point where nothing is recognizable. No one has to worry when the story ends what comes next month or next issue.

Alan Moore 's Supreme disproves both of these theories

[MRP]

I'm not terribly interested in reading Superman fanfic, though nothing is stopping people from writing it.

Everything you read that was produced after Siegel and Shuster left the book has been pastiche/fan fiction, so what does it matter what corporate brand is on the fan fic you are reading? Or whether the people producing it are getting paid for it or not? Pastiche is pastiche whether produced by fans or professional writers who did not create the characters. Big 2 comics are essentially a pastiche business. Not a good or bad thing, there's good pastiches and bad pastiches, but it is what it is.

-M

[Kuwagaton]

Much agreed. I don't feel that the company line is what Superman is really about and quality certainly doesn't hinge on the DC brand.

Characters like Supreme come up quickly along these lines, but I think more of say... Doc Savage, Santa, or Thor (Ragnarok and Klaus are neat).

[Jim Kelly]

Is there any proof that being in the public domain gives people a better story or that public domain characters even manage to stay relevant?

Sure there are people who want to write and draw Superman and some even want to make movies and TV shows about him. But I wonder it that isn't because Warner is a big company that can pay people well.

There's only two examples I can think of that kind of support the argument. One is WICKED and the other is 50 SHADES OF GREY.

WICKED is an interesting case where fan fiction of THE WIZARD OF OZ (the book) became popular--albeit for the musical more than the actual fan fiction book--yet the musical movie of THE WIZARD OF OZ is still protected by copyright.

50 SHADES OF GREY is odd because it's fan fiction about TWILIGHT, yet turned into a copyrightable work.

So it hardly seems like copyright really gets in the way of people who want to do creative things with a property. What about AN UNLIKELY PROPHET by Alvin Schwartz? Did he have to clear it with DC to do that book?

I suspect that if Superman had fallen in the public domain, the amount of Superman stories would be less not more. And the people doing that stuff would not necessarily be the top talents.

I don't think there's any proof that the copyright issue is what's holding Superman back.

[MRP]

Is there any proof that being in the public domain gives people a better story or that public domain characters even manage to stay relevant?

Sherlock Holmes?

2 popular hit tv series, one on CBR in America, one on the BBC, new collections of the stories going into print regularly, new prose stories featuring the character and concepts in a variety of settings and interpretations, a couple of recent hit feature films and many of these attracted top tier talent not hacks and scrubs. So yes there is life after Public Domain.

Not to mention properties in public domain that keep attracting new projects by top talent like of hay Frankenstein, Dracula, etc. etc.

-M

[Jim Kelly]

I don't see that being in the public domain helps or hurts Sherlock Holmes. For awhile Holmes gets hot and then goes back to being not hot. I'm not sure when copyright expired in Britain or if it has expired. Seems like most Holmes projects could still have happened, if those involved worked with the rights holders. And a great many that adapt Holmes stick to what Doyle created and the original stories. Even SHERLOCK is a kind of modern adaptation of the original work--in some ways even more faithful than other adaptations. I don't remember any new stories that have been written in prose--the original form that Doyle's work appeared in (although I recall he also did it as a play)--so it doesn't seem like public domain has generated a lot of popular new books about Holmes. There's probably a lot out there, but they haven't become as popular as the original stories. And those alternate fictions could probably exist even with copyright in play.

Likewise with Dracula.

Frankenstein is much older and it seems to me that if you want Superman to be like Frankenstein then you have to accept that people are going to do all kinds of things with the character that have nothing to do with the original sources. And again, Frankenstein goes hot and cold. The main incentive for someone is to create something using one of these characters that they can copyright--and then no one else can use their own peculiar version of the concept without paying them. So if that happened with Superman, then some company like Disney would own their own distinct version of Superman and all the liberties they took with the character to make him distinct and that would be the official Walt Disney's Superman. So you would still have copyright, just from a different rights holder.

At best you would have several different Superman concepts, each owned by different rights holders. And for ahwile these would be popular, but then the glut of competing Superman products would drive away the competition. And you could have Superman disappear completely--except for fan fiction, which already exists--until someone saw a way to make money from him again. So there would be periods of famine followed by feast.

And for every Sherlock Holmes there's thousands of other public domain characters that we never hear about anymore. And how does that get us more Superman comics? Movies, toys, video games--maybe--but the comics? Who is going to bother to publish Superman comics? It's not like making comic books is the preferred way to get money out of an intellectual property these days. It seems to me the only reason DC continues to exist as a comic book company is so they can maintain the copyrights and trademarks. The real money is in movies, T-shirts and games.

It's holding copyright and trademark that gives the rights holders a reason to make money out of what they own. If there's nothing to be gained then why bother? You'll just get people who want to do something on the cheap and ride on the coattails of the character's fame--so long as that fames exists--so they can do knock-off T-shirts and pornos to make a quick buck. That could just drag down Superman's image and turn him into a laughing stock.

[Trey Strain]

I would say that in general people haven't really made a good use of stuff that's in the public domain. There are some early television shows that have fallen into the public domain that could be revived profitably, I think. But besides that, a lot of stuff that should be in the public domain has been kept out of it by moneyed interests.

The Wizard of Oz is now in the public domain, but you'd have to be careful not to depict anything that the 1939 movie inspired.

This is the kind of stuff that copyright holders do:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...-stories.shtml

http://copyright.nova.edu/mickey-public-domain/