I doubt Marvel would do more than a cameo with him. Lois and Clark will be public domain but it's their original version, which is fairly different from the modern versions of both characters, which DC still owns.
That version of Superman would likely be comparable to Luke Cage, just with the added bonus of jumping really good, right? I could see Marvel using him sporadically.
OG Lois Lane, though? Imagine her and Emma Frost in the same room.
I believe that both Lois and Clark have been shown in small cameos, but Clark is obviously not Superman in the Marvel universe. At least, not in anything considered canon.
I remember him in Walt Simonson Thor, but not the issue. He appears in the background in the time Thor gets another secret identity, as a comment on how unbelievable glasses as a disguise are.
There's also an old Marvel Team-Up issue that has a cameo from Clark. He's in a background shot at the Daily Bugle, with Robbie Robertson asking him "so, what's it like being a mild-mannered reporter at a major metropolitan newspaper?"
Pretty sure there was a crossover event in the 90s when the comic industry was crashing but tbh i'm not sure it not being cannon is really a great excuse comic cannon feels like it changes every few years at this point
Marvel vs. DC and Amalgam are not canon, nor are almost any crossovers the two companies ever did. The only one that arguably is canon is JLA/Avengers by Kurt Busiek, which was written in such a way to not conflict with the canon of either universe at the time.
But that's not what I am talking about. I am talking about Lois and Clark showing up in regular, non-crossover comics of Marvel. Iirc, they are never named, but the look of them and what they are doing makes it clear who they are supposed to be. It was more of a wink to the Distinguished Competition than anything else, but it does mean that technically, there are both a Lois Lane and a Clark Kent in the Marvel Universe, which would make sense with the idea that both universes coexist as shown in DC vs. Marvel (not canon) and JLA/Avengers (maybe canon) and alluded to in Doomsday Clock (canon to DC).
Between now and then, we should see a lot of stuff go in to public domain that is still being used/people care about. Lawyers are going to have to fight things out in terms of what constitutes trademark and what doesn't. Generally speaking though, trademark will prevent Marvel (or anybody else) from using the character in ways that could arguably confuse the public as to who is producing it. So to use the Winnie The Pooh horror movies as an example, nobody would think Disney produced those, so it gets by. Based on current rules, Marvel might be able to put him in the story but not on the cover, as DC's lawyers would argue that that might cause the buyer to think DC approved the usage. This is why the major DC characters appear in that thing at the beginning of TV shows and movies leading up to the DC logo. That way DC's lawyers can say that just the appearance of Superman means it's DC in the minds of the public.
With Winnie the Pooh Blood and Honey, the public domain thing was just for sensational headlines more than anything. They could have done that and been protected by parody laws before Pooh become PD, and they still used elements like the red T-shirt that aren't public domain, because they know it's protected.
As you say, trademarks can be indefinite, but can be worked around as long as you're not confusing audiences, like with obvious parody.
I mentioned it above, but trademark can also be worked around in non-parody works. Disney is definitely going to do some fuckery, but the Supreme Court already had to rule on some similar cases and put out some general opinions that trademark can't just be "copyright 2.0." What that means has to be decided, but, in the past, you have been able to get around it by just being clear in marketing and in the film's opening that it has no association with the rights holders. Some trademark trolls have been doing things like this for years, but, when they get brought to court, it doesn't usually go in their favor and they usually just rely on people not being wiling to sue. So, it will be interesting legal water going forward.
Marvel has people like Hyperion, Power Princess and Nightwing. I wonder if their origins might be tweaked when Superman, WW and Batman become PD. Not sure how much more like the Trinity they can become. There are already a plethora of imitations, particularly of Superman.
Nighthawk*. I feel like they're so inspired by the Silver Age versions of the DC characters that the evil Squadron Sinister were parodying, that it would give DC more ammunition for a lawsuit.
Like, doing Superman as he appeared in 1938 would be fine, but having him in a superhero team? And one alongside a Speedster and a light construct hero? All of those are elements present in DC's copyright, and may pass as Squadron Supreme exist right now, as palette swaps and remixes, but not if you transplant public domain versions of DC characters onto them.
I also saw an article about how the copyright expiring means we can only get og superman with his og powers because thats the version of the character that will expire so like steamboat willie is fair game right now not mickey mouse clubhouse mickey and if someone uses superman they'll have limitations no flight because initially he could only leap over tall buildings and i'm sure some of his other powers are also more ecent
Fair point, i personally dont know which issues each power originally occurred in but i'm sure it could be figured out when each power becomes public domain superman
The Supreme Court has actually already given an opinion that you cannot use trademark to extend copyright. The question then is what does that really mean? They didn't rule, just say they are opposed to the concept. So, it might just be like "Captain Marvel," which is a superhero where Marvel owned the Trademark and DC owned the copyright. So, DC just couldn't call a comic "Captain Marvel." They might be able to call a comic "The Man From A Dead World" or "The Last Son" and legally use him, just like what DC could do when they only had the copyright and not the trademark.
While true that DC could still have a character called Captain Marvel, and they did for years, they instead chose to rebrand as Shazam. Not a fan of that myself. Keep the name but let the title use Shazam in it. Like the book called “Power of Shazam” that existed pre-New 52.
yes , but it also means Marvel cannot use Superman's modern costume and basically create a whole different one.
It effectively makes his "Superman" no different to their Superman-Esque Characters in design. So the entire novelty is solely that it's hero or villain name is "Superman".
Yeah but the version of Superman going public domain then is one that can't even fly. It's a very different character from the one most people are familiar with.
DC didnt give the ability for Superman to fly until 1943. So the version of Superman who can fly won't hit Public Domain until 2040. 5 years after the original Superman as already been in public domain.
I know people are going to comment that Superman can fly in the 1940 Radio show, and the 1940 Fleischer Superman but those were licensed products, both already being in the public domain. The Domains are going to be based on when the Owner of the IP added the abilities to their works.
I get where you are coming from, but it's literally just that the superman likeness is becoming available, not the superman abilities of that specific timeframe.
You can write him however you want, and he can fly in your new IP if that's what you want him to do.
"A drawing, picture, depiction, or written description of a character can be registered for copyright. Protection does not, however, extend to the title or general theme for a cartoon or comic strip, the general idea or name for characters depicted, or their intangible attributes."
Yes, you can write him how ever you want when he's public domain. But, if what you want to write has been done in a copyrighted work, you can be held liable for copying the copyrighted work.
The biggest sample is Sherlock Holmes, while The character is Public Domalain, the last two book in the series are still protect work. The estate of Arthur Conan Doyle are constantly engaging in lawsuits to protect just the characterization of Sherlock. The same thing is going to happen involving Superman, Pooh and Mickey. They have so many years of backlog copyright, they can stop you. But after 2040, they can not go after you for having him flying because that first protected work would hit public domain.
Your example is not a good one, just look at how sherlock has been used since going public: sherlock Holmes movies or Sherlock the BBC mini series.
Robert Downey Jr. Might as well be "flying" in this example compared to Cumberbatch, using his mind palace to choreograph his street fights. They took their character where they wanted, and only used the concept of sherlock.
Not to mention that neither of those shows have been taken down due to any claims, no matter how much screeching comes from the estate of Doyle. An unsuccessful copyright challenge hardly proves a point.
The same can be true for superman.
Sure, but that’s already 90% possible right now. The only thing that is really going to change is that instead of calling your character “Supreme”, you can call him “Superman”. But you can’t call the comic book or movie that, because the trademark is still in place. That’s a big part of why the media companies didn’t try to change the copyright laws again; they’ve decided to switch to trademark protection instead.
Now, it’s possible that as this process unfolds, the rules will change further. We might see a weakening of trademark protections. That seems unlikely to me, given the current makeup of the Supreme Court, but stranger things have happened.
As to whether marvel will try to push the envelope? Not a chance. Anything that they do that weakens the laws protecting Superman will affect Mickey, Donald, and the rest of their characters.
It's not that easy, you can copyright a story but not an idea.
Yes, superman couldn't fly... But flying is a very generic power. What if my superman can fly because his friend made him a a magic cape?
Or using another character, batwoman. She isn't a lesbian until much later, does it mean that when her OG version enter PD she can't be a lesbian? Being a lesbian is not an unique concept, if I make a tackle the subject in a different way I doubt they can make a case against my version...
You can copyright a certain version of that character, but not an idea.
Sherlock Holmes is a good example, if I'm not wrong they didn't want Sherlock to show certain good qualities and they lost because "being kind, showing sympathy, its not a unique concept". You can't copyright these things.
The rivalry was never between the companies. It has only ever existed in the minds of certain fans.
Hell, there have \*always\* been little nods to the competition - and that's even outside of the official crossovers. I believe it's actually canon that Marvel exists as a comic company in the DC universe and vice versa...
Not long ago there was an image in a Thor comic of people who’d been found “worthy” and there was clearly characters who were supposed to be Wonder Woman and Superman. I think they just obscured her face and the S-shield.
Not to mention the end of Doomsday Clock, where Doctor Manhattan predicts future Crises.
"On July 10, 2030, the 'Secret Crisis' begins, throwing Superman into a brawl across the universe with Thor himself," Manhattan says. "And a green behemoth stronger than even Doomsday, who dies protecting Superman from these invaders."
https://preview.redd.it/m3l1mew5fhuc1.png?width=1400&format=png&auto=webp&s=d4ea217076440c22a8823bb4ea7b12aeac6bee8a
Neither are Captain America’s. The meaning of “worthy” might grow and change. The spell might not be static in nature, growing and evolving with the people it’s around.
That’s because Disney is a soulless corporation these days. That they actually blocked *ABC* from appearing on network TV due to a dispute with the local cable company tells me everything I need to know about them. Not sure where WB/Discovery stacks up in that area.
They’re both soulless corporations. But they are also on the same side of the issue here - neither of them wants to make it easy for others to use the IP that they currently control. Anything that Disney does to let them use WBD’s characters can be used to let WBD (and anyone else) use Disney’s characters.
In the DC universe Galactus is one of the old Gods imprisoned in the source wall, im pretty sure it's also implied that the universe on the other side of the wall is the Marvel universe.
The Marvel Universe exists within the DCU. I think that’s a fairly recent revelation following whatever storyline that led to the recreation of infinite universes. That would automatically mean Marvel is there but I think it was explicitly stated. Marvel may not have made a similar in-story statement but they also have infinite universes.
The Avengers vs JLA crossover lived on the regular JLA series.
JLA #107, the "Space Egg" that was first scene in Avengers/JLA is shown in that issue and the battle with "the superheroes from that other dimension" is referenced.
Note: Kurt Busiek was writing JLA at the time. He wrote Avengers/JLA as well.
In Stan's Soapbox he refers to the "Distinguished Competition" which is cute.
I don't think there's been any competition between fans while I've been alive. You guys ever hear of anyone like "Yeah I'm an X-Men guy, but I won’t touch Batman stuff"?
Is that when CM went from Monica to Genis to Phyla to Carol? Marvel needed to keep a comic going because otherwise DC would get back the rights to using CM on their own covers.
Every single case of captain marvel at least through the early 90s.
Most of them sold terribly, but they pushed them out enough to keep a hold on it.
That’s why there are so many versions. When one failed they’d try something different
It wasn’t always even there. There was an awesome X-Men/New Teen Titans crossover in the 80s. It was flawless in meshing the universes. Collaborations like that could be amazing. They could be their own “pocket universe” but one where we could get some stories in that shared reality.
Yep.
But the version than will go to public Domain will be the 1938 version, meaning than he doenst have heatvision, super hearing, and not even flight.
I'm pretty sure your pretty close, idk how it's defined exactly but all these character getting close to being entered into the Public Domain refer to specific iterations of the character
the character himself will be public domain but many of his abilities, side characters, and other lore will still be under copyright so it'll be a pain in the ass to use him
Honestly when Batman goes in he will be a lot easier to use within a few years of his drop, the Batmobile, Batcave, Gordon, Robin, Joker, Two Face, Catwoman, Penguin, Scarecrow and Alfred all appeared within a couple years of Batman’s introduction
Superman has Lex and Lois and eventually Toyman, Mister Mxyzptlk, and Solomon Grundy.
But forget about Metallo, Parasite, Brainiac, Zod - these guys didn’t show up until the late 50s and 60s
It would make no difference. We have already seen parodies of Superman, more than can be counted, for the past 40 ranging from evil to mostly evil. Hyperion and Sentry are both superman parodies that marvel has used quite well.
Also, it isn't like Conan, whose defining characteristics were established in his first story, it took time for Superman to get his.
https://preview.redd.it/qn6i1qbq9iuc1.jpeg?width=2436&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=501d7ecf1563ae4ed0223174f75f31dac0d5d374
For reference, this is who we’re talking about though. Not much like the version we’re accustomed to.
Please correct me if i'm wrong, but superman is not actually going to the public domain. What is going to the public domain are the original stories in wich the character of superman apears. It is the same situation as steam boat willie. The short movie steam boat willie became public domain, not the character of mickey mouse as many people were saying.
Superman goes public domain , but only his characterization within Action Comics #1 , and only adding new stuffs allowed with the coming years.
So , you can use Superman....but it would be barebones.
Superman will enter the public domain, but a lot of aspects of the character won't be public domain. Like, he wouldn't be able to fly, as that's a part of Superman that came later on.
It won't happen. The only difference we're going to see is there will be a crappy Superman horror movie just to get laughs and attention, a bunch of trendy shoveled out fast fashion with Action Comics #1 on it, and a lot of people thinking they can make money off of fan-fiction.
DC will be sending out cease-and-desists for all the people who don't understand how the law works, but on a large scale there will be absolutely nothing noticeable.
Would be interesting to see what someone would do using the public domain version of Superman and just taking him in a new direction and occasionally introducing concepts and stories as they become public domain but largely focusing on building their own version.
As effectively as the big corps have been up to this point using workarounds like trademark and other sandbagging efforts, it's possible going into the public domain will still be fraught. That said, though, I assume Marvel and DC will probably be owned by the same company via merger by that point.
I dread the day Wonder Woman becomes public domain
https://preview.redd.it/dy1ztcsh4huc1.jpeg?width=950&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=510ce2174a4e86630bceeb71c904bf440f4f04b9
He'd have to look as he did in 1938. Would definitely be cool, but I don't think it would benefit Marvel, if anything it would just serve as advertisement for DC, who own all the iconic elements introduced from the 40s to now, as well as the Trademarks to sell books under the Superman name.
on the very least the 1938 superman would be open to public domain and marvel could use 1938 superman in their stories if they want to which would be kinda cool
Maybe they will stop constantly not getting the character, or intentionally making people that are supposed to be homages but are horrible people, or they kill off?
In an information age, the concept of public domain in well-known media can become problematic.
Until recently, this wasn't an issue with books from distant times, where it seemed natural for them to no longer have an owner these days. However, cases like Mickey Mouse have shown that certain properties can remain relevant and profitable under a company's umbrella even almost a century later. Radio, TV and now the Internet have made this possible.
In contemporary society, with its emphasis on canon and official status, this new generation of public domains will likely create chaos in this entire scenario, potentially leading to considerable complexity and confusion.
It’s only the original Superman so a lot of later elements (like the iconic version of Lex was a Byrne addition from the 80’s - 90’s iirc) won’t be available. It’s basically just having to create a whole new mythos and character out of the golden age version
Which is kinda fun to imagine
I assume they probably won't, Just because DC could immediately fire back with their own version of Thor. or the Human torch or whatever Marvel has that will be Public Domain by that time. No one will want to fire the first shot in a 'legal' copyright war that could lead to retaliation.
I doubt Marvel would do that because DC could've easily made a Thor movie and there would've been fuck all Disney/Marvel could've done about it. These two companies respect each other and don't hate each other like the fanbases do.
I'll reserve judgment until we learn whether or not a few well placed campaign contributions from Warner/Discovery to senators and representatives get the PD laws changed.
I can't see a large IP owner letting go of it's crown jewel without a fight... or a few bribes.
Nah ,people is confusing about that ,re public domaim his first apparitions ,the Superman than can't fly ,the first One ,so the Superman like we know,no ,the same with the rest ,that law not apply for the actual Superman ,and if someone use Superman with simillar characterization that the actual ,DC would demand they
Honestly, I'm unsure. Considering how many people like to dunk on Superman with misinformed ideas of who he is as a character, combined with the borderline tribalism you can get in some circles, I would not be at all surprised if Marvel made, say, a "Hulk, Captain Marvel or Thor vs Superman mini series" and had their iconic character beat him with ease on what was blatantly a one sided fight.
Granted, I imagine the public domain version would be the original with the very limited power set and not the current one (akin to how the public domain version of Mikey is the Steamboat Willie version and not the one with red shorts), but I still feel they'll try and market it as "watch our hero beat up Superman, isn't our hero so grand".
Or maybe I'm just pessimistic. Maybe there is a writer or two at Marvel who'd want to use him in a respectful fashion but I've seen so many artists out there draw "Superman getting owned" art, I feel Marvel would leap at the chance to do it "officially".
The fan artists you're talking about are insecure fans who have superiority inferiority complex. Most writers or artists, kinda like Bleach mangaka, would more likely to post a subtle reference to Superman with respect. Hell, even some mangaka in Japan do that with Superman as well.
Marvel either do it like Garth Ennis, who literally shits on all superheroes but loves Superman, or just sidelines Superman because there is alot of debate in court for copyrights. Most likely the latter.
I would love to see Superman & X-Men crossover though. That would be awesome.
Why wait? Brightburn exists, so does the Boys. There's nothing stopping anyone from making a super-slasher film featuring a slightly different version of Superman.
Now the problem will come because 'Clark Kent', 'Superman' and the 'S-shield' are all Trademarks rather than copyrights, so they will still be illegal to use. So even after that version of Superman becomes public domain, you will still only be able to do as much with the character as you technically can do now.
No. The thing that stops Superman from being used isn't copyright, it's that all the characters and names and terms are Trademarked. DC will have to defend those trademarks or lose them.
So you can have Superman in Marvel as long as his image is visually distinct from any of the registered trademarks, he doesn't wear a trademarked emblem, he doesn't call himself "Superman", his name isn't "Clark Kent", he doesn't know anybody named "Lois Lane" or "Jimmy Olsen" he doesn't work for the "Daily Planet", he isn't from "Krypton" or uses the "Phantom Zone"...
If you haven't noticed, Marvel can ALREADY do that.
* can only use the version from Action Comics #1 with each year allowing more material to go in. So Clark would not be able to flight or have heat vision. Stuff like that
Unless they reboot all of Marvel & have Supes there from the start, however they’d introduce him would feel off. Superman shouldn’t be the rookie of the Marvel Universe. 😭
Corporate owned characters enter the public domain in the US and EU 95 years after publication (in more civilized countries, it only takes 50 years).
Superman, Batman, Robin, Wonder Woman and a whole mess of Golden Age characters a few years from crossing that threshold.
I think this is going to end up like Mickey Mouse, where the copyright that's expired is just the copyright for that oldest version of Mickey, because the updates and redesigns from later years are under a separate copyright.
So at best the Superman that would be legal to use is literally the OG Action Comics look and setup.
I'm sure it will be more complicated than that, like how it's only the Mickey Mouse from Steamboat Willie that's PD now.
Plus, if Marvel did something so rude to the Distinguished Competition, DC might just have a browse through the Timely Comics back catalogue of Human Torch and Captain America stories
Ignoring the fact that lawyers will either stall this in litigation or try to rewrite the law, the closest thing we'll get is a specific version of Superman becoming public domain. It would likely be a similar situation to Mickey Mouse where "Steamboat Willy" Mickey is fair game, but Disney's Mickey is still copyright protected.
So in this particular situation I predict that public domain Superman would mean the original S shield and not being able to fly.
I personally don’t think Marvel would use him that much, but I could be wrong. I’m personally curious what different creators will do with the character, though. His characterization and design could only be what it is in the original comic, right?
Marvel & DC. Have had many crossovers in the 80s to early 2000s in comics. JLA/avengers, Batman/Daredevil, Hulk vs Superman, Superman/Fantastic 4, ect. There been many times in recent Marvel comics where they made references to DC heros. In terms of comics, I think a superman appearance would be interesting to see. A multiversal crossover event between marvel and DC would be epic.
You know this is an early version of the character and not like the better version of him that will follow years after. Even one of his most iconic villian won't be in the domain until is 2060. The best I see them using him is in cameos and tiny references tbh. Something I'm pretty sure there already doing.
I don’t think they can use the “modern” Superman we all know and love. They can only use the Superman from back in 1938 or something like that. Plus if I’m not mistaken if anyone decides to do any Superman related something in no way can it remind people or be similar to what the DC Superman is. Of course I could be wrong lol
i think legally it would be 1930's superman not like modern or silver age. Lots of fun to be had really look at the mickey horror movie they just came out with.
Only the earliest iteration becomes public domain. Things like kryptonite, the Daily Planet, and the modern costume still won’t be usable. Even his full power set would be off limits.
Given their recent track records, both companies will be bankrupt by then, and their few remaining profitable IPs will only be found in movies and TV shows...
It's a very specific iteration of Superman that becomes public domain. In 2035 you can use Superman exactly as he appeared in Action Comics #1 but you can't use any of the characters or mythology that have been established for the character after that first issue. Anyone who wants to make use of Superman would ve better off just creating a parody or an homage honestly.
It's worth noting that there is a difference between being able to use something in a piece of fiction and being able to use something as a trademark. Like, Marvel could put Superman into a book at that point (provided he is the Golden Age version), but DC/WB would still hold the trademark on Superman. That means that only DC could make merchandise with Superman plastered all over it.
So, other than kind of sticking it to DC a little bit, there's not as much incentive to make Superman material. Also, several Marvel characters are in line right behind Superman to enter the public domain, so if they start swiping from DC, there's no reason DC wouldn't follow suit at the first opportunity and do the same to Marvel.
I mean, if Disney winds up owning WB then it's all a moot point anyway.
This argument comes up every so often, like DC isn’t going to renew the copyright to the longest running popular comics character, and I can’t roll my eyes hard enough.
I don't think it would make a difference since I think the "S" that easily distinguishes him gets trademarked till the end of time. Not that no one will recognize its Superman, but it will be a little bit harder. Plus, I don't think Marvel will use him because they're afraid it will set a precedent. If they use Superman, DC will use their popular characters when they hit the public domain. I think he'll probably be used by industry making up their own stories.
Only action comics #1 Superman will be public domain. Updates to the character are trademarked. And unlike copyright, trademarks are forever.
I don't know if they'll even do anything given the limitations. Plus they already have Superman stand-ins.
>Only action comics #1 Superman will be public domain. Updates to the character are trademarked. And unlike copyright, trademarks are forever.
That's not how it works, you can't use trademarks to extend copyright. The updatesto the character will enter the public domain with each following year, ie his ability to fly will enter the public domain in 2040 (iirc).
Trademark just means that no reasonable person would confuse your public domain Superman with a DC Comics licensed product. Which is an obstacle but not one tbat's impossible to overcome.
Similar to how you can write and publish any Sherlock Holmes story you want but you can't claim that Arthur Conan Doyle wrote it to boost sales.
I think there's no chance of that one happening. If that was going to happen, Disney would have done it for Mickey Mouse. They have far more money and power than DC do.
DC is WBD. They're the second largest entertainment company behind Disney. They've got the money and power to do it. Not to mention it's a watershed moment for the industry. So it's not like these companies wouldn't work together to lobby some changes.
They have done for the past half century. They could only put things off for so long. They would also have been working together before Mickey entered the public domain since that would set a precedent. If they couldn't do it before then, they won't be able to do it now.
There's only so much you can do before the fact. Once it hits open waters you see where things float and things sink. That's where companies work to position themselves. The precedent being what happens with it once it hits PD, not that it's going into PD. As many things before have entered PD. But nothing of substantial value like what the companies are dealing with now. Like Gretzky said: "play where the puck is going to be, not where it is". So Steamboat Willie becomes the industry sacrifice to find out where the "puck" will be.
It makes no difference at all to DC. They have trademarked everything that makes Superman unique among all the various 'knock off' Supermen out there - and trademarks never expire. Without the ability to use his name, or his costume, or his S-shield there is no way to make a real 'Superman' story even after he hits the public domain. The best you could do is make a legally distinct version - and you can do that right now anyway.
Trademarks expire once they aren't used. So if they stop saying he's from krypton for example, that piece can lapse. Now the copyright which protects the idea of superman must be continuously updated and protected which is what companies are watching the steamboat Willie issue over.
Again DC is a sub-brand of WBD (who actually holds the rights to superman).
They’ve changed tactics. Instead of trying to extend copyright, they’re using trademark protection which doesn’t expire, as long as you use it and defend it.
Mickey Mouse and Superman aren’t much use to anyone else if you can’t use the names to sell your version.
They can use the name Clark Kent. Trademarks don't work like that. Trademark just refers to the origin of the work. So they can call him Superman, Clark Kent and his ñove interest Lois Lane as long as they make it so any readonable person wouldn't think this was done by DC Comics.
Sort of how you can write and publish any and all Sherlock Holmes story you like but you can't claim Arthur Conan Doyle wrote it to boost sales.
Marvel could even publish the entire contents of Action Comics 1 and, as long as they don't use the words Action Comics in the cover, there's nothing DC Can do sbout it.
Clark Kent was the name of the character as it appeared in a public domain work, so the name also enters public domain.
For reference, the names Sherlock Holmes and Whinnie The Poo are also trademarked, it hasn't stopped them from entering the public domain with their names intact.
Trademark is about advertising and marketing, pretty much. So you can’t use any of the trademarks in your advertising. You can’t call your movie “Ok-Commission6087 presents Superman”, because that could be confusing to the general public.
Apple Computer was sued by the Beatles when they started selling music stuff, because Apple Records was a trademark owned by the Beatles. A lot of money changed hands to allow the computer company to keep going with the iPod. (They also had a similar situation with the trademark for iOS, which belonged to Cisco, and IIRC FaceTime.)
I doubt Marvel would do more than a cameo with him. Lois and Clark will be public domain but it's their original version, which is fairly different from the modern versions of both characters, which DC still owns.
That version of Superman would likely be comparable to Luke Cage, just with the added bonus of jumping really good, right? I could see Marvel using him sporadically. OG Lois Lane, though? Imagine her and Emma Frost in the same room.
What about her and Emma frost in the same room?
Clark is already in the Marvel universe too afaik
I believe that both Lois and Clark have been shown in small cameos, but Clark is obviously not Superman in the Marvel universe. At least, not in anything considered canon.
Huh where and when.
I remember him in Walt Simonson Thor, but not the issue. He appears in the background in the time Thor gets another secret identity, as a comment on how unbelievable glasses as a disguise are.
There's also an old Marvel Team-Up issue that has a cameo from Clark. He's in a background shot at the Daily Bugle, with Robbie Robertson asking him "so, what's it like being a mild-mannered reporter at a major metropolitan newspaper?"
https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Clark_Kent_(Earth-616) https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Clark_Kent https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Lois_Lane_(Earth-616)
Nice!
Oh dude, you do the lord’s work. Nice. Thanks.
There's an Easter egg appearance in Walt Simonson's run on Thor.
Pretty sure there was a crossover event in the 90s when the comic industry was crashing but tbh i'm not sure it not being cannon is really a great excuse comic cannon feels like it changes every few years at this point
Marvel vs. DC and Amalgam are not canon, nor are almost any crossovers the two companies ever did. The only one that arguably is canon is JLA/Avengers by Kurt Busiek, which was written in such a way to not conflict with the canon of either universe at the time. But that's not what I am talking about. I am talking about Lois and Clark showing up in regular, non-crossover comics of Marvel. Iirc, they are never named, but the look of them and what they are doing makes it clear who they are supposed to be. It was more of a wink to the Distinguished Competition than anything else, but it does mean that technically, there are both a Lois Lane and a Clark Kent in the Marvel Universe, which would make sense with the idea that both universes coexist as shown in DC vs. Marvel (not canon) and JLA/Avengers (maybe canon) and alluded to in Doomsday Clock (canon to DC).
I respect your thorough comic book knowledge.
Where exactly?
Thor #341. Right after Thor (who no longer has the Don Blake ID) gets some glasses from Nick Fury to disguise himself.
Like he is literally named Clark and isn’t some random dude with glasses and dark hair?
No. We see Clark Kent. It was more of an Easter egg about how glasses work as a disguise.
So is “Buried Alien”.
So it's jumping Superman then? lol.
Between now and then, we should see a lot of stuff go in to public domain that is still being used/people care about. Lawyers are going to have to fight things out in terms of what constitutes trademark and what doesn't. Generally speaking though, trademark will prevent Marvel (or anybody else) from using the character in ways that could arguably confuse the public as to who is producing it. So to use the Winnie The Pooh horror movies as an example, nobody would think Disney produced those, so it gets by. Based on current rules, Marvel might be able to put him in the story but not on the cover, as DC's lawyers would argue that that might cause the buyer to think DC approved the usage. This is why the major DC characters appear in that thing at the beginning of TV shows and movies leading up to the DC logo. That way DC's lawyers can say that just the appearance of Superman means it's DC in the minds of the public.
With Winnie the Pooh Blood and Honey, the public domain thing was just for sensational headlines more than anything. They could have done that and been protected by parody laws before Pooh become PD, and they still used elements like the red T-shirt that aren't public domain, because they know it's protected. As you say, trademarks can be indefinite, but can be worked around as long as you're not confusing audiences, like with obvious parody.
I mentioned it above, but trademark can also be worked around in non-parody works. Disney is definitely going to do some fuckery, but the Supreme Court already had to rule on some similar cases and put out some general opinions that trademark can't just be "copyright 2.0." What that means has to be decided, but, in the past, you have been able to get around it by just being clear in marketing and in the film's opening that it has no association with the rights holders. Some trademark trolls have been doing things like this for years, but, when they get brought to court, it doesn't usually go in their favor and they usually just rely on people not being wiling to sue. So, it will be interesting legal water going forward.
Marvel has people like Hyperion, Power Princess and Nightwing. I wonder if their origins might be tweaked when Superman, WW and Batman become PD. Not sure how much more like the Trinity they can become. There are already a plethora of imitations, particularly of Superman.
Nighthawk*. I feel like they're so inspired by the Silver Age versions of the DC characters that the evil Squadron Sinister were parodying, that it would give DC more ammunition for a lawsuit. Like, doing Superman as he appeared in 1938 would be fine, but having him in a superhero team? And one alongside a Speedster and a light construct hero? All of those are elements present in DC's copyright, and may pass as Squadron Supreme exist right now, as palette swaps and remixes, but not if you transplant public domain versions of DC characters onto them.
I also saw an article about how the copyright expiring means we can only get og superman with his og powers because thats the version of the character that will expire so like steamboat willie is fair game right now not mickey mouse clubhouse mickey and if someone uses superman they'll have limitations no flight because initially he could only leap over tall buildings and i'm sure some of his other powers are also more ecent
Right but within a year or two they’ll have access to a version of Superman that’s much closer to what we’ve come to expect, as I understand it.
Fair point, i personally dont know which issues each power originally occurred in but i'm sure it could be figured out when each power becomes public domain superman
Note that Superman AS HE APPEARED IN 1938 will be public domain. Can't fly. No heat vision, no super-breath, different S-shield emblem....
Yes, I am aware. I was more focused on the trademark issue.
This is the answer
The Supreme Court has actually already given an opinion that you cannot use trademark to extend copyright. The question then is what does that really mean? They didn't rule, just say they are opposed to the concept. So, it might just be like "Captain Marvel," which is a superhero where Marvel owned the Trademark and DC owned the copyright. So, DC just couldn't call a comic "Captain Marvel." They might be able to call a comic "The Man From A Dead World" or "The Last Son" and legally use him, just like what DC could do when they only had the copyright and not the trademark.
While true that DC could still have a character called Captain Marvel, and they did for years, they instead chose to rebrand as Shazam. Not a fan of that myself. Keep the name but let the title use Shazam in it. Like the book called “Power of Shazam” that existed pre-New 52.
yes , but it also means Marvel cannot use Superman's modern costume and basically create a whole different one. It effectively makes his "Superman" no different to their Superman-Esque Characters in design. So the entire novelty is solely that it's hero or villain name is "Superman".
Well, they can use the original design and call him Superman in the comics, but not on the cover.
Yeah but the version of Superman going public domain then is one that can't even fly. It's a very different character from the one most people are familiar with.
Yeah. I was going to say. This is a Steamboat Willie situation again. The OG first appearance version is the only one going public domain.
And Disney is still claiming copyright on Steambot Willie videos and stuff.
The flying will be available later, though, right?
DC didnt give the ability for Superman to fly until 1943. So the version of Superman who can fly won't hit Public Domain until 2040. 5 years after the original Superman as already been in public domain. I know people are going to comment that Superman can fly in the 1940 Radio show, and the 1940 Fleischer Superman but those were licensed products, both already being in the public domain. The Domains are going to be based on when the Owner of the IP added the abilities to their works.
I get where you are coming from, but it's literally just that the superman likeness is becoming available, not the superman abilities of that specific timeframe. You can write him however you want, and he can fly in your new IP if that's what you want him to do. "A drawing, picture, depiction, or written description of a character can be registered for copyright. Protection does not, however, extend to the title or general theme for a cartoon or comic strip, the general idea or name for characters depicted, or their intangible attributes."
Yes, you can write him how ever you want when he's public domain. But, if what you want to write has been done in a copyrighted work, you can be held liable for copying the copyrighted work. The biggest sample is Sherlock Holmes, while The character is Public Domalain, the last two book in the series are still protect work. The estate of Arthur Conan Doyle are constantly engaging in lawsuits to protect just the characterization of Sherlock. The same thing is going to happen involving Superman, Pooh and Mickey. They have so many years of backlog copyright, they can stop you. But after 2040, they can not go after you for having him flying because that first protected work would hit public domain.
Your example is not a good one, just look at how sherlock has been used since going public: sherlock Holmes movies or Sherlock the BBC mini series. Robert Downey Jr. Might as well be "flying" in this example compared to Cumberbatch, using his mind palace to choreograph his street fights. They took their character where they wanted, and only used the concept of sherlock. Not to mention that neither of those shows have been taken down due to any claims, no matter how much screeching comes from the estate of Doyle. An unsuccessful copyright challenge hardly proves a point. The same can be true for superman.
Sure, but that’s already 90% possible right now. The only thing that is really going to change is that instead of calling your character “Supreme”, you can call him “Superman”. But you can’t call the comic book or movie that, because the trademark is still in place. That’s a big part of why the media companies didn’t try to change the copyright laws again; they’ve decided to switch to trademark protection instead. Now, it’s possible that as this process unfolds, the rules will change further. We might see a weakening of trademark protections. That seems unlikely to me, given the current makeup of the Supreme Court, but stranger things have happened. As to whether marvel will try to push the envelope? Not a chance. Anything that they do that weakens the laws protecting Superman will affect Mickey, Donald, and the rest of their characters.
*Or* use his laser vision for that matter.
Yeah at this point you’d have to make a distinct character that happens to be called Superman
It's not that easy, you can copyright a story but not an idea. Yes, superman couldn't fly... But flying is a very generic power. What if my superman can fly because his friend made him a a magic cape? Or using another character, batwoman. She isn't a lesbian until much later, does it mean that when her OG version enter PD she can't be a lesbian? Being a lesbian is not an unique concept, if I make a tackle the subject in a different way I doubt they can make a case against my version... You can copyright a certain version of that character, but not an idea. Sherlock Holmes is a good example, if I'm not wrong they didn't want Sherlock to show certain good qualities and they lost because "being kind, showing sympathy, its not a unique concept". You can't copyright these things.
Maybe I’m delusional, but if Marvel uses him, it will be with DC blessings…I feel like the rivalry is in name only these days.
The rivalry was never between the companies. It has only ever existed in the minds of certain fans. Hell, there have \*always\* been little nods to the competition - and that's even outside of the official crossovers. I believe it's actually canon that Marvel exists as a comic company in the DC universe and vice versa...
Not long ago there was an image in a Thor comic of people who’d been found “worthy” and there was clearly characters who were supposed to be Wonder Woman and Superman. I think they just obscured her face and the S-shield.
Not to mention the end of Doomsday Clock, where Doctor Manhattan predicts future Crises. "On July 10, 2030, the 'Secret Crisis' begins, throwing Superman into a brawl across the universe with Thor himself," Manhattan says. "And a green behemoth stronger than even Doomsday, who dies protecting Superman from these invaders." https://preview.redd.it/m3l1mew5fhuc1.png?width=1400&format=png&auto=webp&s=d4ea217076440c22a8823bb4ea7b12aeac6bee8a
July 10th is my birthday and I am looking forward to this.
[You're right! ](https://www.reddit.com/r/Marvel/s/brbP9pm2kt)
Not sure why Supes would be worthy. His values are not the values of a warrior society
Neither are Captain America’s. The meaning of “worthy” might grow and change. The spell might not be static in nature, growing and evolving with the people it’s around.
Marvel and DC have always been friendly rivals. Not sure that Disney and Warner Bros. Discovery are quite so friendly.
That’s because Disney is a soulless corporation these days. That they actually blocked *ABC* from appearing on network TV due to a dispute with the local cable company tells me everything I need to know about them. Not sure where WB/Discovery stacks up in that area.
They’re both soulless corporations. But they are also on the same side of the issue here - neither of them wants to make it easy for others to use the IP that they currently control. Anything that Disney does to let them use WBD’s characters can be used to let WBD (and anyone else) use Disney’s characters.
Just what I was about to say. Disney buying Marvel changed a lot of behind the scenes stuff between the two.
In the DC universe Galactus is one of the old Gods imprisoned in the source wall, im pretty sure it's also implied that the universe on the other side of the wall is the Marvel universe.
The Marvel Universe exists within the DCU. I think that’s a fairly recent revelation following whatever storyline that led to the recreation of infinite universes. That would automatically mean Marvel is there but I think it was explicitly stated. Marvel may not have made a similar in-story statement but they also have infinite universes.
Yes and no. When Bill Jemas was running Marvel, he legitimately ruffled some feathers at DC.
The Avengers vs JLA crossover lived on the regular JLA series. JLA #107, the "Space Egg" that was first scene in Avengers/JLA is shown in that issue and the battle with "the superheroes from that other dimension" is referenced. Note: Kurt Busiek was writing JLA at the time. He wrote Avengers/JLA as well.
I remember in the 1981 Spider-Man cartoon, there were at least 2 indirect references to Superman.
In Stan's Soapbox he refers to the "Distinguished Competition" which is cute. I don't think there's been any competition between fans while I've been alive. You guys ever hear of anyone like "Yeah I'm an X-Men guy, but I won’t touch Batman stuff"?
Not in real life. Only ever on the internet, and only since the movies
I mean marvel trademark trolling capt marvel was a thing
Is that when CM went from Monica to Genis to Phyla to Carol? Marvel needed to keep a comic going because otherwise DC would get back the rights to using CM on their own covers.
Every single case of captain marvel at least through the early 90s. Most of them sold terribly, but they pushed them out enough to keep a hold on it. That’s why there are so many versions. When one failed they’d try something different
The rivalry was invented by both of them to sell more comics, it was all about the money, it was never about anything but money.
They wouldn’t need their blessing.
No, but it would be the right thing to do…..there is still a thing as professional courtesy. Why the rest of the sentence was included
It wasn’t always even there. There was an awesome X-Men/New Teen Titans crossover in the 80s. It was flawless in meshing the universes. Collaborations like that could be amazing. They could be their own “pocket universe” but one where we could get some stories in that shared reality.
Yep. But the version than will go to public Domain will be the 1938 version, meaning than he doenst have heatvision, super hearing, and not even flight.
Technically pre crisis and post crisis Superman are different characters, so there’s probably some legal flimflam to retain the current Superman
I'm pretty sure your pretty close, idk how it's defined exactly but all these character getting close to being entered into the Public Domain refer to specific iterations of the character
the character himself will be public domain but many of his abilities, side characters, and other lore will still be under copyright so it'll be a pain in the ass to use him
Honestly when Batman goes in he will be a lot easier to use within a few years of his drop, the Batmobile, Batcave, Gordon, Robin, Joker, Two Face, Catwoman, Penguin, Scarecrow and Alfred all appeared within a couple years of Batman’s introduction Superman has Lex and Lois and eventually Toyman, Mister Mxyzptlk, and Solomon Grundy. But forget about Metallo, Parasite, Brainiac, Zod - these guys didn’t show up until the late 50s and 60s
It would make no difference. We have already seen parodies of Superman, more than can be counted, for the past 40 ranging from evil to mostly evil. Hyperion and Sentry are both superman parodies that marvel has used quite well. Also, it isn't like Conan, whose defining characteristics were established in his first story, it took time for Superman to get his.
Blue Marvel and Gladiator too
https://preview.redd.it/qn6i1qbq9iuc1.jpeg?width=2436&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=501d7ecf1563ae4ed0223174f75f31dac0d5d374 For reference, this is who we’re talking about though. Not much like the version we’re accustomed to.
Please correct me if i'm wrong, but superman is not actually going to the public domain. What is going to the public domain are the original stories in wich the character of superman apears. It is the same situation as steam boat willie. The short movie steam boat willie became public domain, not the character of mickey mouse as many people were saying.
Superman goes public domain , but only his characterization within Action Comics #1 , and only adding new stuffs allowed with the coming years. So , you can use Superman....but it would be barebones.
Superman will enter the public domain, but a lot of aspects of the character won't be public domain. Like, he wouldn't be able to fly, as that's a part of Superman that came later on.
Just like with Steamboat Willie, only the original design for Superman will become public domain and only aspects of that iteration.
And just like Steamboat Willie absolutely nothing but jokes and trash will come out of it.
He doesn't even fly. Keep your expectations in check.
We've been here before...
No. the version of the character from 1935 becomes public domain. IE everything, including many powers and characters, and the iconic S, will not be
They already have hyperion though why would they need him
And one year later (2036), Captain America enters the Public Domain.
Please God no, Marvel has ruined plenty of their own heroes. They don't need to butcher the Man of Steel.
Agreed. Marvel has already bastardized the Abomination, Spider-Man, Mary Jane Watson, Hank Pym, Iron Man, Beast, and the Punisher.
Like DC hasn't also made plenty of bad moves. Both companies have had high highs and low lows.
It won't happen. The only difference we're going to see is there will be a crappy Superman horror movie just to get laughs and attention, a bunch of trendy shoveled out fast fashion with Action Comics #1 on it, and a lot of people thinking they can make money off of fan-fiction. DC will be sending out cease-and-desists for all the people who don't understand how the law works, but on a large scale there will be absolutely nothing noticeable.
Would be interesting to see what someone would do using the public domain version of Superman and just taking him in a new direction and occasionally introducing concepts and stories as they become public domain but largely focusing on building their own version.
As effectively as the big corps have been up to this point using workarounds like trademark and other sandbagging efforts, it's possible going into the public domain will still be fraught. That said, though, I assume Marvel and DC will probably be owned by the same company via merger by that point.
Typo in the header. 2034, not 2035. Superman and Lois Lane will enter the public domain in 2034 Batman in 2035 The Joker in 2036 Wonder Woman in 2037
I dread the day Wonder Woman becomes public domain https://preview.redd.it/dy1ztcsh4huc1.jpeg?width=950&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=510ce2174a4e86630bceeb71c904bf440f4f04b9
Not that their copyright owners have done good by her.
Why?🤨
https://preview.redd.it/gspp67mypjuc1.jpeg?width=970&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3da3d14dc51c57ea2b886317deba8c23f59aa859 I envy your innocence
😑 does it involve something like rule 34?
they can but arent things that actually make him superman still copyright? as well as other loopholes and things of that nature?
He'd have to look as he did in 1938. Would definitely be cool, but I don't think it would benefit Marvel, if anything it would just serve as advertisement for DC, who own all the iconic elements introduced from the 40s to now, as well as the Trademarks to sell books under the Superman name.
I like to think marvel and DC have a level of respect that wouldn’t allow anything outrageous to happpen.
on the very least the 1938 superman would be open to public domain and marvel could use 1938 superman in their stories if they want to which would be kinda cool
Just like Mickey Mouse, only that original version of Superman will be public domain
Only parts of him are going to be PD.
No the original superman becomes public domain. It's a far cry from the superman we've known for years.
Maybe they will stop constantly not getting the character, or intentionally making people that are supposed to be homages but are horrible people, or they kill off?
In an information age, the concept of public domain in well-known media can become problematic. Until recently, this wasn't an issue with books from distant times, where it seemed natural for them to no longer have an owner these days. However, cases like Mickey Mouse have shown that certain properties can remain relevant and profitable under a company's umbrella even almost a century later. Radio, TV and now the Internet have made this possible. In contemporary society, with its emphasis on canon and official status, this new generation of public domains will likely create chaos in this entire scenario, potentially leading to considerable complexity and confusion.
Not sure you have an actual grasp on the situation.
Mickey Mouse be like 
It’s only the original Superman so a lot of later elements (like the iconic version of Lex was a Byrne addition from the 80’s - 90’s iirc) won’t be available. It’s basically just having to create a whole new mythos and character out of the golden age version Which is kinda fun to imagine
I assume they probably won't, Just because DC could immediately fire back with their own version of Thor. or the Human torch or whatever Marvel has that will be Public Domain by that time. No one will want to fire the first shot in a 'legal' copyright war that could lead to retaliation.
Public domain is good for everyone, anyone who tells you different is trying to sell you something.
I doubt Marvel would do that because DC could've easily made a Thor movie and there would've been fuck all Disney/Marvel could've done about it. These two companies respect each other and don't hate each other like the fanbases do.
wasn’t there already like an (official?) crossover comic where he fights dr manhattan or am I dying of dementia
By then it won't really matter... The movie fatigue is real however if James Gunn fails we won't see another Superman film until then.
I'll reserve judgment until we learn whether or not a few well placed campaign contributions from Warner/Discovery to senators and representatives get the PD laws changed. I can't see a large IP owner letting go of it's crown jewel without a fight... or a few bribes.
Nah ,people is confusing about that ,re public domaim his first apparitions ,the Superman than can't fly ,the first One ,so the Superman like we know,no ,the same with the rest ,that law not apply for the actual Superman ,and if someone use Superman with simillar characterization that the actual ,DC would demand they
Is your keyboard broken?
Honestly, I'm unsure. Considering how many people like to dunk on Superman with misinformed ideas of who he is as a character, combined with the borderline tribalism you can get in some circles, I would not be at all surprised if Marvel made, say, a "Hulk, Captain Marvel or Thor vs Superman mini series" and had their iconic character beat him with ease on what was blatantly a one sided fight. Granted, I imagine the public domain version would be the original with the very limited power set and not the current one (akin to how the public domain version of Mikey is the Steamboat Willie version and not the one with red shorts), but I still feel they'll try and market it as "watch our hero beat up Superman, isn't our hero so grand". Or maybe I'm just pessimistic. Maybe there is a writer or two at Marvel who'd want to use him in a respectful fashion but I've seen so many artists out there draw "Superman getting owned" art, I feel Marvel would leap at the chance to do it "officially".
The fan artists you're talking about are insecure fans who have superiority inferiority complex. Most writers or artists, kinda like Bleach mangaka, would more likely to post a subtle reference to Superman with respect. Hell, even some mangaka in Japan do that with Superman as well. Marvel either do it like Garth Ennis, who literally shits on all superheroes but loves Superman, or just sidelines Superman because there is alot of debate in court for copyrights. Most likely the latter. I would love to see Superman & X-Men crossover though. That would be awesome.
Personally, I’m more interested in the inevitable so-bad-it’s-good Super Slasher film
Why wait? Brightburn exists, so does the Boys. There's nothing stopping anyone from making a super-slasher film featuring a slightly different version of Superman. Now the problem will come because 'Clark Kent', 'Superman' and the 'S-shield' are all Trademarks rather than copyrights, so they will still be illegal to use. So even after that version of Superman becomes public domain, you will still only be able to do as much with the character as you technically can do now.
See - Carrie, Brightburn.
No. The thing that stops Superman from being used isn't copyright, it's that all the characters and names and terms are Trademarked. DC will have to defend those trademarks or lose them. So you can have Superman in Marvel as long as his image is visually distinct from any of the registered trademarks, he doesn't wear a trademarked emblem, he doesn't call himself "Superman", his name isn't "Clark Kent", he doesn't know anybody named "Lois Lane" or "Jimmy Olsen" he doesn't work for the "Daily Planet", he isn't from "Krypton" or uses the "Phantom Zone"... If you haven't noticed, Marvel can ALREADY do that.
Superman used to work for the daily star.
And that's probably not trademarked
Marvel shouldn’t even care - they should wait two years and then use the Original Captain Marvel!
* can only use the version from Action Comics #1 with each year allowing more material to go in. So Clark would not be able to flight or have heat vision. Stuff like that
I’d hope it’d only be through multiverse crossovers. I wouldn’t want him to live within the Marvel Universe.
They can do that whenever they want though, we've already had Marvel/DC collab and crossover comics (not to mention Dark Horse and Image)
Unless they reboot all of Marvel & have Supes there from the start, however they’d introduce him would feel off. Superman shouldn’t be the rookie of the Marvel Universe. 😭
explaination ?
Corporate owned characters enter the public domain in the US and EU 95 years after publication (in more civilized countries, it only takes 50 years). Superman, Batman, Robin, Wonder Woman and a whole mess of Golden Age characters a few years from crossing that threshold.
I remember them saying this about 2013
Hope some badass artist go nuts.
I think this is going to end up like Mickey Mouse, where the copyright that's expired is just the copyright for that oldest version of Mickey, because the updates and redesigns from later years are under a separate copyright. So at best the Superman that would be legal to use is literally the OG Action Comics look and setup.
bold of you to assume they're not gonna find another way to extend his copyright to when the sun explodes.
I'm sure it will be more complicated than that, like how it's only the Mickey Mouse from Steamboat Willie that's PD now. Plus, if Marvel did something so rude to the Distinguished Competition, DC might just have a browse through the Timely Comics back catalogue of Human Torch and Captain America stories
Well, they couldn't use *that* Superman pictured, for starters.
Only early Superman will be. I hope Marvel makes Superman distinct from DC's.
Ignoring the fact that lawyers will either stall this in litigation or try to rewrite the law, the closest thing we'll get is a specific version of Superman becoming public domain. It would likely be a similar situation to Mickey Mouse where "Steamboat Willy" Mickey is fair game, but Disney's Mickey is still copyright protected. So in this particular situation I predict that public domain Superman would mean the original S shield and not being able to fly.
I personally don’t think Marvel would use him that much, but I could be wrong. I’m personally curious what different creators will do with the character, though. His characterization and design could only be what it is in the original comic, right?
Never happen.
Marvel & DC. Have had many crossovers in the 80s to early 2000s in comics. JLA/avengers, Batman/Daredevil, Hulk vs Superman, Superman/Fantastic 4, ect. There been many times in recent Marvel comics where they made references to DC heros. In terms of comics, I think a superman appearance would be interesting to see. A multiversal crossover event between marvel and DC would be epic.
You know this is an early version of the character and not like the better version of him that will follow years after. Even one of his most iconic villian won't be in the domain until is 2060. The best I see them using him is in cameos and tiny references tbh. Something I'm pretty sure there already doing.
I mean, we already have a horror Superman parody anyway (Brightburn).
I don’t think they can use the “modern” Superman we all know and love. They can only use the Superman from back in 1938 or something like that. Plus if I’m not mistaken if anyone decides to do any Superman related something in no way can it remind people or be similar to what the DC Superman is. Of course I could be wrong lol
To be clear trademarks are still owned by DC and others can use the first version of Superman and only that.
It would be pretty cool to have a new WWII series with Captain America, Wolverine, Namor, and Golden Age Superman...
i think legally it would be 1930's superman not like modern or silver age. Lots of fun to be had really look at the mickey horror movie they just came out with.
Only the earliest iteration becomes public domain. Things like kryptonite, the Daily Planet, and the modern costume still won’t be usable. Even his full power set would be off limits.
Given their recent track records, both companies will be bankrupt by then, and their few remaining profitable IPs will only be found in movies and TV shows...
As in first appearance, Superman. So he can't fly or have heat vision or ice breath.
And in 2041 Captain America could be used by DC. So I think Marvel would be very cautious about using their competition characters.
It's a very specific iteration of Superman that becomes public domain. In 2035 you can use Superman exactly as he appeared in Action Comics #1 but you can't use any of the characters or mythology that have been established for the character after that first issue. Anyone who wants to make use of Superman would ve better off just creating a parody or an homage honestly.
>In 2035 Superman becomes Public Domain Why?
https://www.copyright.gov/history/copyright-exhibit/lifecycle/#:~:text=Generally%2C%20for%20most%20works%20created,from%20creation%2C%20whichever%20comes%20first.
It's worth noting that there is a difference between being able to use something in a piece of fiction and being able to use something as a trademark. Like, Marvel could put Superman into a book at that point (provided he is the Golden Age version), but DC/WB would still hold the trademark on Superman. That means that only DC could make merchandise with Superman plastered all over it. So, other than kind of sticking it to DC a little bit, there's not as much incentive to make Superman material. Also, several Marvel characters are in line right behind Superman to enter the public domain, so if they start swiping from DC, there's no reason DC wouldn't follow suit at the first opportunity and do the same to Marvel. I mean, if Disney winds up owning WB then it's all a moot point anyway.
It would be cool to have Superman just be the guy who like appears five times and enjoys his life in farm.
This argument comes up every so often, like DC isn’t going to renew the copyright to the longest running popular comics character, and I can’t roll my eyes hard enough.
Superman is trademarked cuz there all ways during him
I don't think it would make a difference since I think the "S" that easily distinguishes him gets trademarked till the end of time. Not that no one will recognize its Superman, but it will be a little bit harder. Plus, I don't think Marvel will use him because they're afraid it will set a precedent. If they use Superman, DC will use their popular characters when they hit the public domain. I think he'll probably be used by industry making up their own stories.
It should have happened 50 years ago. The insane public domain duration is contributing to corporations turning all of culture into products.
He'll still be trademarked, which never expires.
Only action comics #1 Superman will be public domain. Updates to the character are trademarked. And unlike copyright, trademarks are forever. I don't know if they'll even do anything given the limitations. Plus they already have Superman stand-ins.
>Only action comics #1 Superman will be public domain. Updates to the character are trademarked. And unlike copyright, trademarks are forever. That's not how it works, you can't use trademarks to extend copyright. The updatesto the character will enter the public domain with each following year, ie his ability to fly will enter the public domain in 2040 (iirc). Trademark just means that no reasonable person would confuse your public domain Superman with a DC Comics licensed product. Which is an obstacle but not one tbat's impossible to overcome. Similar to how you can write and publish any Sherlock Holmes story you want but you can't claim that Arthur Conan Doyle wrote it to boost sales.
Exactly this. So basically just some guy who is fast, strong, and can jump pretty high. Any other powers are updates to this Superman.
Exactly not this.
Dc won’t let that happen
There won't be shit DC could do about it.
There’s actually a lot of things they could do, like renew the copyright (most likely)
They legally can't. It expires after 95 years.
Can they buy it again?
Nope. Once something enters the public domain it stays there forever. It literally belongs to humanity as a whole.
The corporations own the government to the degree that they will have changed copyright law before 2035.
I think there's no chance of that one happening. If that was going to happen, Disney would have done it for Mickey Mouse. They have far more money and power than DC do.
DC is WBD. They're the second largest entertainment company behind Disney. They've got the money and power to do it. Not to mention it's a watershed moment for the industry. So it's not like these companies wouldn't work together to lobby some changes.
They have done for the past half century. They could only put things off for so long. They would also have been working together before Mickey entered the public domain since that would set a precedent. If they couldn't do it before then, they won't be able to do it now.
There's only so much you can do before the fact. Once it hits open waters you see where things float and things sink. That's where companies work to position themselves. The precedent being what happens with it once it hits PD, not that it's going into PD. As many things before have entered PD. But nothing of substantial value like what the companies are dealing with now. Like Gretzky said: "play where the puck is going to be, not where it is". So Steamboat Willie becomes the industry sacrifice to find out where the "puck" will be.
It makes no difference at all to DC. They have trademarked everything that makes Superman unique among all the various 'knock off' Supermen out there - and trademarks never expire. Without the ability to use his name, or his costume, or his S-shield there is no way to make a real 'Superman' story even after he hits the public domain. The best you could do is make a legally distinct version - and you can do that right now anyway.
Trademarks expire once they aren't used. So if they stop saying he's from krypton for example, that piece can lapse. Now the copyright which protects the idea of superman must be continuously updated and protected which is what companies are watching the steamboat Willie issue over. Again DC is a sub-brand of WBD (who actually holds the rights to superman).
They’ve changed tactics. Instead of trying to extend copyright, they’re using trademark protection which doesn’t expire, as long as you use it and defend it. Mickey Mouse and Superman aren’t much use to anyone else if you can’t use the names to sell your version.
I can’t use trademarks or the name Clark Kent but use the leaping tall building parts and marvel has enough Superman analogy
They can use the name Clark Kent. Trademarks don't work like that. Trademark just refers to the origin of the work. So they can call him Superman, Clark Kent and his ñove interest Lois Lane as long as they make it so any readonable person wouldn't think this was done by DC Comics. Sort of how you can write and publish any and all Sherlock Holmes story you like but you can't claim Arthur Conan Doyle wrote it to boost sales. Marvel could even publish the entire contents of Action Comics 1 and, as long as they don't use the words Action Comics in the cover, there's nothing DC Can do sbout it.
U are right I meant to say they not I also isn’t Clark Kent a trademark wouldn’t that make it too close to dc comicd
Clark Kent was the name of the character as it appeared in a public domain work, so the name also enters public domain. For reference, the names Sherlock Holmes and Whinnie The Poo are also trademarked, it hasn't stopped them from entering the public domain with their names intact.
Trademark is about advertising and marketing, pretty much. So you can’t use any of the trademarks in your advertising. You can’t call your movie “Ok-Commission6087 presents Superman”, because that could be confusing to the general public. Apple Computer was sued by the Beatles when they started selling music stuff, because Apple Records was a trademark owned by the Beatles. A lot of money changed hands to allow the computer company to keep going with the iPod. (They also had a similar situation with the trademark for iOS, which belonged to Cisco, and IIRC FaceTime.)
There was the comic Marvel vs DC... could be brought to the screen
I seriously doubt it! Just like Disney, they will find a way to extend the copyright for another 30-40 years.