An artist's rendition of what the Superman display might look like

If everything goes as planned, by this summer visitors arriving in Cleveland by plane will be greeted by a display marking the city as the birthplace of Superman.

The Plain Dealer reports Cleveland City Council was expected last night to approve a proposal by the Siegel and Shuster Society to install a permanent display in Cleveland Hopkins International Airport honoring the Man of Steel and his creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, who dreamed up the superhero as teenagers living in the city’s Glenville neighborhood.

The display, which is expected to cost between $40,000 and $50,000, would include a larger-than-life statue of Superman, facts about his creation and related sightseeing information, all under the familiar logo and the words “Greater Cleveland’s Greatest Hero” and “Did You Know Superman Was Born in Cleveland?”

An anonymous donor has already given $5,000 toward the project, and organizers hope to raise more from Superman fans. Donations can be sent to: The Siegel and Shuster Society, 7100 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, Ohio, 44103.

Graded at 9.0, the rare 1938 comic easily surpassed the previous record of $1.5 million set in March 2010 for the same issue, featuring the first appearance of Superman. That copy was graded slightly lower, at 8.5.

Vincent Zurzolo, chief operating officer of ComicConnect/Metropolis Collectibles, told Comic Riffs that the issue that sold this evening — bidding closed at 7:25 p.m. ET — is the best copy of Action Comics he’s ever seen.

“The buyer was extremely excited about the prospect of bidding on this,” he said. “I think he had an adrenalin rush for the last two hours.”

The comic was stolen from Cage’s Los Angeles home in 2000, and discovered in April by an unidentified man who claims to have bought the contents of an abandoned San Fernando Valley, California, storage locker. Although Zurzolo wouldn’t reveal the comic’s previous owner, he did confirm that his company played a role in its recovery.

About 100 copies of Action Comics #1 are believed to exist, but only a handful of those are in good condition.

Mike Meyer

The Illinois man who stole thousands of dollars worth of Superman memorabilia from a mentally disabled collector in late August has been sentenced to six years in prison.

The Belleville News Democrat reports that Gerry Armbruster, 38, pleaded guilty today to stealing the collection from Mike Meyer and assaulting and robbing an elderly man. Armbruster befriended Meyer, a 48-year-old man who lives on Social Security and works part-time at McDonald’s, before swindling him out of more than 1,800 Superman comics, figures and other memorabilia he’d been collecting since 1974.

News of the theft drew worldwide attention, with fans and creators from as far away as Australia and the United Kingdom rallying to replace Meyer’s stolen items.

Police arrested Armbruster in mid-September while investigating the forcible robbery of money and jewelry from a 76-year-old man, and were able to recover Meyer’s collection. The grateful fan, who lives with his dogs Krypto and Dyno, pledged to give the donated memorabilia to charity. “People were generous to me,” he said at the time. “This is how I can be generous in return.”

Armbruster’s sentencing comes as Meyer is on vacation in Cleveland, birthplace of Superman, courtesy of Carol & John’s Comic Book Shop. He and Keith Howard, who organized the effort to replace the stolen items, visited the former home of Jerry Siegel on Monday, and today toured area comic shops, where they received gift certificates. Their trip will conclude tonight with a party at Carol & John’s.

“I feel like I’m connected with Siegel and Shuster,” Meyer told the Plain Dealer from the living room of the Siegel house, “a piece of history was created here.”

The studio filed a 65-page complaint in May 2010 accusing Marc Toberoff, its longtime legal nemesis, of orchestrating “a web of collusive agreements” that led the Siegel family to reject “mutually beneficial” longtime deals with DC Comics and seek to recapture copyright to the Man of Steel. The lawsuit, which hinges on documents stolen from Toberoff’s office and delivered anonymously to Warner Bros., is designed to force him to resign as the lawyer for the Siegels, who in 2008 successfully terminated the original 1938 transfer of copyright for Action Comics #1. The window will open in 2013 for Shuster’s estate to do the same.

Toberoff filed a motion in August 2010 to dismiss the studio’s complaint under California anti-SLAPP laws designed to curb lawsuits intended to intimidate the opposition through delays and legal expense.

However, U.S. District Judge Otis Wright ruled Toberoff had failed to demonstrate that his role as attorney for the Siegel and Shuster heirs is protected under the California statutes. Wright specifically cited a business deal Toberoff struck with the Shuster estate that he characterized as “not an agreement for the provision of legal services, but one concerning the exploitation of Joe Shuster’s creations.” That’s presumably a reference to an arrangement that Warner Bros. charged would give Toberoff and his companies “a controlling financial interest in the families’ collective claims — leaving him as the largest financial stakeholder” in the Man of Steel.

Toberoff insisted in court filings that he hadn’t consulted with the Siegels, and had yet to even meet them, when they dropped their previous attorneys and formally called off negotiations with DC Comics in September 2002. He said that while two of his companies, IP Worldwide and Pacific Pictures, had agreements with the heirs, those have either expired or been terminated.

According to Variety, Wright also ruled that Toberoff must turn over a letter from Siegel’s daughter, Laura Siegel Larson, to her half-brother Michael, which Warner Bros. contends will support its claims that the attorney “tortiously interfered” in settlement talks.

The letter presumably was in response to the one written by Michael Siegel in May 2003 warning Laura not to become involved with Toberoff, whom he described as a “mysterious billionaire” plotting with Hollywood agent Ari Emanuel to gain control of Superman for themselves. (Michael’s letter was among the papers stolen from Toberoff’s office). Although never close with his father, Michael still has a financial stake in the outcome of the case. Toberoff allegedly had attempted to involve Michael in the effort to reclaim the copyrights but was rejected.

Characterized by Matt Fraction as “the most important $412 dollars in comics history,” the check written to a young Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, in part, for the rights to Superman, has surfaced among the items for an upcoming auction.

“Have you ever made a business decision that haunted you?” writer Gerry Duggan tweeted Monday, pointing to images of the check. “This piece of true comics history will make you feel better.”

Indeed that check, written March 1, 1938, by Detective Comics Publisher Jack Liebowitz, has been key to several legal and moral disputes, the first beginning barely a year after its signing. (Bleeding Cool notes an April 6, 1939, stamp on the back for the U.S. District Court of New York, suggesting it was entered as evidence in DC’s copyright-infringement lawsuit against Bruns Publications over the Will Eisner-created Wonder Man.)

Of the $412, $130 was for the rights to Superman; the remaining $282 was in payment for stories contributed to Detective Comics, Adventure Comics and More Fun Comics. It’s worth pointing out that Liebowitz managed to misspell the last names of both Siegel and Shuster, leading them to sign twice on the back.

The check will be among the items from Siegel’s personal collection auctioned Nov. 14-30 by Comic Connect. Other memorabilia include Siegel’s favorite suit and tie, clumps of his hair — yes, you read that correctly — his personal typewriter and a Superman script.

“Much has been made of the original 1938 $130 payment to Jerome Siegel and Joe Shuster,” Comic Connect said in a statement. “Did DC Comics take advantage of two eager young men looking for their big break in the comic business or was this unequivocally fair business practice between comic book writers and publishers in a 1938 America? Whatever you believe, the $130 check is the quintessential symbol of this debate for the ages.”

Justice League #1 (Second Printing)

Publishing | DC Comics will allocate the second printing of Justice League #1, with retailers receiving 32 percent of their orders, which now won’t ship until Sept. 21, the same day the third printing will be released. ICv2 reports some stores are concerned that potential new readers drawn in by the publisher’s promotional campaign for the New 52 won’t understand the two-week wait to pick up a copy of the comic. The website also runs down the list of cable television shows during which DC’s New 52 commercial is airing. [ICv2.com]

Passings | Comic Art Community reports that artist Dave Hoover passed away earlier this week. Hoover, who drew runs of Captain America and Starman in the 1990s, more recently worked on Zenescope’s Charmed comic. Before working in comics, Hoover was an animator, working on Flash Gordon, He-Man and the Masters of the Universe, She-Ra: Princess of Power, The Super Friends, The Smurfs and many more in the 1970s and 1980s. [Comic Art Community]

The Astonishing Secret of Awesome Man

Creators | In support of The Astonishing Secret of Awesome Man, his new superhero children’s book (with Jake Parker), Michael Chabon tells the Wall Street Journal he wrote it for “the primary focus group,” his son Abe. “This was a story that I wanted to write for him. He’s at the age when, boys in particular, you get into kindergarten and it becomes much more important that you know how to control your body and strength, to restrain yourself and hold yourself back. He was working through a lot of that stuff and occasionally struggling with it. Part of the recipe of a four or five-year-old boy is superheroes and fascination with superheroes. They want to wear costumes all the time. They’ll wear their costumes to school. Part of what makes a superhero a superhero is the ability to use his body and have this incredible power and strength. It seemed like the superhero was a perfect figure to create a little story about someone who needs to control his power and recognize the limits of his power.” [The Wall Street Journal]

Creators | Continuing his publicity tour for Habibi, Craig Thompson talks about the new book in advance of this weekend’s SPX, which Thompson is attending as a special guest. [Washington City Paper]

Green River Killer: A True Detective Story

Creators | Writer Jeff Jensen chats with Geoff Boucher about his true-crime graphic novel, Green River Killer: A True Detective Story. [Hero Complex]

Creators | Retired Marine Capt. Dale Dye and his wife Julia Dye discuss Code Word: Geronimo, which tells the story of SEAL Team Six and the mission to kill Osama bin Laden. [USA Today]

Reviews | Spencer Ackerman takes a look at the 9/11 Truther comic The Big Lie, saying Rick Veitch’s newest work “makes Frank Miller’s forthcoming Holy Terror seem calm and reasonable.”[Wired]

Reviews| Robot 6 contributor J. Caleb Mozzocco reviews Boys of Steel, a children’s book about Superman creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster that tells a carefully restricted version of the story as a picture book but adds a more unvarnished version at the end in text form. [Every Day Is Like Wednesday]

Troop 142

Reviews | Greg McElhatton reads Mike Dawson’s Troop 142 in collected form, after having followed it as a webcomic, and finds that it’s a somewhat different experience: “It was fun, that sort of story about young men at camp that instantly feels real. But reading again a year later, all in one sitting? There’s a much stronger emotional heft to the story that I think is slightly lost in serialized format.” [Read About Comics]

Reviews | Similarly, Xaviar Xerexes finds that the collected edition of Zahra’s Paradise packed a punch that the webcomic didn’t: “This may be the most emotional, involving comic I’ve read this year. I’ve read along with the webcomic but sitting down with the book and reading the story from start to finish was immersive and cathartic.” [ComixTalk]

Comic strips | How do you get your comic strip picked up by King Features? It’s a long shot in this market, says editor Brendan Burford, but he lays out the basics of what they are looking for. What not to do: Submit your comic in a glitter-covered binder or a toilet seat. Oddly, the comments get hijacked by fans of something called 2 Cows and a Chicken, which they keep pleading with Burford to pick up, even after he explains nicely why he can’t. File that under What Not to Do. [DailyINK Blog, via The Daily Cartoonist]

Retailers | Three comic shops within a mile radius of one another? That makes Falls Church sound like heaven. [Falls Church News-Press]

Funnyman, their creator-owned follow-up to Superman after their falling out with National, the company that became DC Comics, is generally seen as an example of how hard it is to catch lightning in a bottle a second time.

Writers Thomas Andrae and Mel Gordon have taken up that footnote and expanded on it like never before, focusing on an aspect of the creators’ careers that could use the focus in their 2010 book Siegel and Shuster’s Funnyman: The First Jewish Superhero.

The sub-title suggests a thesis that I’m not entirely sure the book itself supports, and I’m even less sure that’s where the ultimate value of the book lies (particularly to an audience like us).

The book is sectioned off into articles by the authors and reprints and summaries of Funnyman comic book stories and comic strip stories. Mel Gordon’s “The Farblondjet Superhero and his Cultural Origins” notes that the fourth issue of Funnyman was released the same week the state of Israel was declared in 1948, claiming the hero was a perfect one for the time of immense Jewish anxiety.

From their he launches into a relatively long history of Jewish comedy (35 pages of a 185-page book), including discussion of various out-dated theories as to why the Jewish people have come to be regarded as a more humorous people than other groups, and then a brisk but thorough recounting of their traditions of humor and their interface with pop culture through the dawn of Golden Age Hollywood.

That’s followed by Andrae’s “The Jewish Superhero,” which discusses the legend of the Golem and the popular golem films, Polish strongman Siegmund Breitbart, and, in his next chapter, the widely recognized Jewish aspects of Superman.

If one is considered to be Jewish by birth, then most of first generation of superheroes, including Superman, Batman and Captain America, are Jewish, given than one or more of their “parents” were Jewish. But if a critic or scholar wants to determine their Jewishness based on certain characteristics, well, Superman still seems just as, if not more, Jewish than Funnyman, even if the latter was patterned after Danny Kaye, spoke in Yididsh and embodied Jewish humor and confidence more than Jewish insecurities and myths the way Superman did.

Regardless, the pair’s scholarship is impressive, and delivered in an engaging enough manner to make the book into something of a breezy and substantial work.

I think a more important revelation than the fact that Siegel and Shuster’s second –man superhero character was pretty Jewish is this: Although Funnyman never caught on and eventually disappeared from the public eye, the comics are actually really, really good.

After the articles, which offer some close readings of a few Funnyman stories for clues of how the creators feel about women and National Comics and the comics industry, several Funnyman stories are reprinted, as are summaries of all six issues of the comic book, and various storylines from the newspaper comics.

The comic book stories are very much kids’ ones, aimed at the kids of the late ‘40s, and Siegel’s humor can be rather eye-rolling (there are a lot of pun names), but the plots themselves are fun and funny in the broad manner of tossed-off superhero comics. (For example, mad scientist Doc Gimmick invents a sexy robot lady to stand on street corners and drop her hankerchief, a huge mallet extended from her back to clobber any men who approach so that Doc and his accomplice can steal their wallets. Instead of, you know, just hitting them on the head with hammers themselves and taking their wallets). But this is some of Shuster’s best art that I’ve seen. It makes sense, given that this is later in his career than the Superman stories we see reprinted most often, the crudely drawn handful of first comics, and from a time when his eyesight was failing but not as badly as it would be during the period in which he produced his latest work we’ve seen published.

Funnyman himself wears exaggerated clown clothes which must have coaxed, even necessitated exaggerated lines, and his transformation from comedian Larry Davis to super-clown Funnyman was more complete and physical than the Clark Kent/Superman one—Shuster widened his eyes, lengthened his neck and changed the shape of his mouth, so the handsome leading man-like Davis became more of a cartoon character.

The exaggerated character designs and broad “acting” of the figures carries through to everyone in the comic book stories. It’s realistic art, but full of life and motion.

Also, is Shuster is free to add a few more va-va’s to the va-va-voom of his female characters. The authors share this panel from a Superman comic, noting that Shuster’s editors thought it was too sexual, and asked whey Lois looked pregnant and had to have the undersides of her breasts shaded.

Here are some of the ladies appearing Funnyman (and you’ve probably already noticed the gal on the cover above).

Given how little Funnyman material there is—only six issues of the comic book—it’s kind of unfortunate that this book features so little of it, but it’s certainly a nice start, and perhaps a more complete collection will follow at some point.

In terms of understanding the story of Siegel, Shuster and the comics industry, though, this is an important work for providing a thus far missing chapter.

Siegel and Shuster’s Funnyman: The First Jewish Superhero by Thomas Andrae and Mel Gordon, Feral House, 240 pages, $25

The Siegel & Shuster Society's concept of what the Superman plate might look like

A Cleveland group dedicated to celebrating the city as the “Birthplace of Superman” is leading a campaign to get the familiar “S” insignia emblazoned on Ohio specialty license plates.

The Plain Dealer reports that the nonprofit Siegel & Shuster Society, founded in 2008 to commemorate the creation of the Man of Steel in the city’s Glenville neighborhood by a teenage Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, has to collect 500 names on a petition as the first step toward the plate. A state senator has agreed to propose the plate in the Ohio legislature once the signatures are gathered.

The organization hopes to have the plates available by 2013, the 75th anniversary of Superman’s debut in Action Comics #1. Specialty plates, sold by the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles, typically cost anywhere between $25 and $35 more than standard plates. A portion of sales would go to the Siegel & Shuster Society to fund Superman projects.

Action Comics #1 by Grant Morrison and Rags Morales

[CBR:] From Siegel and Shuster through later chapters on Kirby or Jim Starlin, you cover a lot of the creative life of the people behind comics and how one informs the other, and you make some particular observations about Siegel and Shuster’s desires as artists as well as professionals. There’s so much chatter over the lawsuits over Superman and what not, but for you, did you feel like the characters transcend some of those debates on their own terms, or is that creative personality something that informs how our whole industry works even to today?

[Grant Morrison:] Well, to me it’s never been honestly what’s interesting about this stuff. I think the stories outlast all of those complications. You look at the people who created those characters, and they’re all dead. But the characters will still be around in 50 years probably – at least the best of them will. So I try not to concern myself with that. These are deals made in times before I was even born. I can say from experience that young creative people tend to sell rights to things because they want to get noticed. They want to sell their work and to be commercial. Then when they grow up and get a bit smarter, they suddenly realize it maybe wasn’t so good and that the adults have it real nice. [Laughs] But still, it’s kind of the world. I wouldn’t want to comment on that because it was something I wasn’t around for. I can’t tell why they decided to do what they did. Obviously Bob Kane came in at the same age and got a very different deal and profited hugely from Batman’s success. So who knows? They were boys of the same age, but maybe some of them were more keen to sell the rights than others. It all just takes a different business head.

– All-Star Superman and Action Comics writer Grant Morrison takes a hands-off approach to the conflict over the rights to Superman between Warner Bros. and the heirs of the character’s creators, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, in conversation with CBR’s Kiel Phegley. Well, sorta hands-off: First he says he’d prefer not to comment because he wasn’t there, but then he points out that Bob Kane secured a much better deal for himself (though not for Bill Finger) at around the same time.

Interestingly, even as the costume changes and potential origin tweaks of the upcoming Superman reboot leave industry observers wondering if they’re a form of insurance should WB and DC lose the Siegel/Shuster legal battle, Morrison has repeatedly gone on record saying that his new Action Comics #1 is directly inspired by Siegel & Shuster’s original, from Superman’s more limited power set to his emergence as something of a street-level social crusader to the constant sense of forward motion the young writer and artist brought to the Man of Steel’s first adventure — an adventure Morrison close-reads to insightful effect in his new book Supergods. If Morrison could once again talk to Superman about himself, what might he say about all this?

Jack Kirby

Legal | Brent Staples pens an editorial for the New York Times on the legal battle between the Jack Kirby estate and Marvel: “The Marvel editor Stan Lee sometimes offered general ideas for characters, allowing the artists to run with them. Mr. Kirby plotted stories, fleshing out characters that he had dreamed up or that he had fashioned from Mr. Lee’s sometimes vague enunciations. Mr. Lee shaped the stories and supplied his wisecrack-laden dialogue. And in the end, both men could honestly think of themselves as ‘creators.’ But Mr. Kirby, who was known as the King of Comics, was the defining talent and the driving force at the Marvel shop. Mr. Lee’s biographers have noted that the company’s most important creations started out in Mr. Kirby’s hands before being passed on to others, who were then expected to emulate his artistic style.” [New York Times]

Awards | Writer Neil Gaiman (Sandman, The Graveyard Book) and artist Shaun Tan (The Arrival, Tales from Outer Suburbia) are among the winners of the 2011 Locus Awards. Gaiman’s “The Truth Is a Cave in the Black Mountains” won for best novelette, while “The Thing About Cassandra” won best short story. Tan won for best artist. [Locus Online]

Legal | Jeff Trexler reviews the legal battle between Warner Bros. and the heirs of creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster through the filter of the Neil Gaiman/Todd McFarlane decision, where a judge ruled Gaiman has copyright interest in Medieval Spawn, Angela and other Spawn characters. [The Beat]

Creators | Nicole Rudick has an in-depth interview with Jim Woodring about his odd visions and the inspiration for Weathercraft and Congress of the Animals. [The Comics Journal]

Retailing | The Boston Globe’s John Dyer talks to two local retailers, That’s Entertainment and Comicopia, about DC Comics’ move to day-and-date digital publishing. [Boston Globe]

Witch Doctor

Creators | Witch Doctor writer Brandon Seifert discusses his Image/Skybound series about a supernatural doctor: “…Morrow’s sort of character archetype — the occult doctor — is a very old idea in horror fiction, but I’ve never seen it played straight,” he says. “Characters like Van Helsing are generally treated as generic monster hunters, and I wanted to see a doctor who approached the supernatural the way a [real] doctor would. And then last in the concept was the idea that all the monsters needed to cause actual diseases from biology.” [io9]

Creators | Tom Field looks back at the life and career of the late Gene Colan. [The Comics Journal]

Comics | Paul Gravett picks the comics he’s most looking forward to from the June Previews. [Paul Gravett]

Comics | Sebastian Strangio looks at several comics — or “gruim-chaek” — produced by the North Korean government. He says the comics are “unabashedly propagandistic, serving up outlandish plots that help inculcate reverence for Great Leader Kim Il Sung and the regime’s perennial battles against imperialists of all stripes.” [Slate]

Retailing | After 16 years in business, Empyre Comics in Glen Burnie, Md. will close its doors on June 30. [The Capital]

Retailing | The American Press profiles Lake Charles, La. comic shop Paper Heroes. [American Press]

reMIND

Webcomics | Lauren Davis spotlights Jason Brubaker’s webcomic-turned-graphic novel, reMIND. “… there’s a lot to enjoy in this online version, from the beautiful, animation-inspired artwork to the epic backstory of love, betrayal, and neurosurgery. And that’s before we get to a mecha-enhanced Victuals fighting his way through a city of lizard men,” she writes. [io9]

Fandom | To help celebrate the birthday of Smurfs creator Peyo, more than 4,800 people dressed as smurfs gathered in Brussels, London, Athens, The Hague, Dublin, Mexico City, Panama City, Warsaw, Moscow, Johannesburg and New York Saturday to break the Guinness World Record for the “largest gathering of people dressed as smurfs within a 24-hour period in multiple venues.” That’s a lot of smurfs. [Metro]

Fandom | Matt Alt translates a 1983 essay from lolicon magazine Manga Burikko telling the otaku it’s time to drop their idealized notions of puberty and grow up. [Neojaponisme]

Action Comics #1

A federal judge has denied an appeal by the attorney representing the heirs of Superman’s creators, clearing the way for Warner Bros. to gain access to documents the studio contends will demonstrate he “orchestrated a web of collusive agreements” that led the families to reject longtime deals with DC Comics.

The documents, which were stolen from the law offices of Marc Toberoff and delivered anonymously to Warner Bros. in December 2008. Although a judge at the time ruled that the documents were privileged and ordered them returned, it was determined that the attached seven-page cover letter was not protected by attorney-client confidentiality. That letter, dubbed the “Superman-Marc Toberoff Timeline,” became the basis for the studio’s 2010 lawsuit against the attorney, in which it claims he acted improperly to convince the heirs of Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster to seek to reclaim the original copyright to the Man of Steel. Warner Bros. also alleges tht Toberoff schemed to secure for himself “a majority and controlling financial stake” in the Superman rights.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Ralph Zarefsky ruled late last month that those documents aren’t protected by attorney-client privilege because Toberoff didn’t fight a grand jury subpoena issued in the investigation of their theft, thus waiving privilege. However, the judge deferred the decision to presiding U.S. District Judge Otis Wright who, according to Hollywood, Esq., on Monday rejected Toberoff’s argument that he had no choice but to cooperate with prosecutors in the burglary investigation.

Barring another appeal, Warner Bros. will finally get unfettered access to the documents that it hopes, at the very least, will force Toberoff, long a thorn in the studio’s side, to resign as the Siegel family’s attorney. Whether the papers are the legal hand grenade that Warner Bros. attorneys have made them out to be, demonstrating improper and even illegal, behavior, of course remains to be seen. Wright could look at the evidence and decide Toberoff’s actions were merely those of an attorney aggressively soliciting clients and (just as aggressively) representing their interests.

If that’s the case, it would make this lawsuit only the latest detour in the decade-long fight for Superman — one that became even more bitter in 2008 following a ruling that Siegel’s widow Joanne Siegel and daughter Laura Siegel Larson had successfully recaptured half of the original copyright to the Man of Steel. The window will open in 2013 for Shuster’s estate to do the same.

Deadline’s Nikki Finke offers spirited commentary on the Warner Bros. lawsuit against Toberoff, focusing on the stolen documents and the studio’s controversial tactics.

The plates on the fence surrounding the site of the Shuster family home (via CapedWonder)

A month after thieves stole a historical marker near the Cleveland house where Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster created the Man of Steel, a man drove through the fence surrounding the site of Shuster’s former home on Tuesday night, damaging large metal plates that reprint the first Superman story.

According to The Plain Dealer, the driver is believed to be a neighbor, who’s offering to pay the estimated $2,600 to replace the seven plates he destroyed. The panels, which reprint pages from Action Comics #1, were installed two years ago by the Glenville Development Corporation and the Siegel and Shuster Society.

There is good news, though, at least regarding the historical marker: The newspaper reports that the plaque, stolen in April from the intersection of St. Clair Avenue and East 105th Street, was left at the Glenville neighborhood fire station, presumably because of the intense publicity surrounding the theft. It’s thought that the aluminum sign was taken by scrap-metal thieves who mistook it for bronze because of its coloring.

Home of Superman historical marker

A historical marker near the Cleveland home where a teenage Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster created Superman has been stolen.

The likely culprits, The Plain Dealer reports, are scrap-metal thieves who mistook the plaque for bronze because of its coloring. It’s actually made of aluminum.

The sign was installed by the city at the intersection of St. Clair Avenue and East 105th Street in 2003, the 65th anniversary of the release of Action Comics #1. The nearby house where the Siegel family lived until 1950, and where the young collaborators dreamed up the Man of Steel, was restored in 2008 through efforts spearheaded by the nonprofit Siegel and Shuster Society. Two larger markers created by that group hang on a fence outside the Glenville neighborhood home.

If there’s a silver, or aluminum, lining to the theft, it’s that it provides officials with the opportunity to make a correction on the replacement: Siegel’s last name was misspelled on one side of the original marker.

Action Comics #1

A federal judge on Monday denied an effort by Warner Bros. to gain access to sensitive documents that are alleged to show an agreement between the heirs of Superman creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster not to strike further copyright deals with the studio, Hollywood, Esq. reports.

The documents, which were at the center of Warner Bros.’ May 2010 lawsuit against Siegel family attorney Marc Toberoff, also purportedly contain a formula for how the two estates, and Toberoff, would divide the Superman assets once they successfully terminate the studio’s rights to the property.

Although Toberoff had convinced the judge in the first trial that those documents were protected by attorney-client privilege, Warner Bros.’ new outside counsel Daniel Petrocelli argued in the 2010 lawsuit that the consent agreement violates the U.S. Copyright Act and, therefore, can’t be insulated from discovery. However, U.S. Magistrate Judge Ralph Zaresky ruled this week that the studio’s assertion that the documents are illegal doesn’t necessarily make them illegal.

Zaresky’s decision is a setback for Warner Bros., which has been waging an increasingly bitter legal battle to hold onto Superman following a 2008 ruling that Siegel’s widow Joanne Siegel and daughter Laura Siegel Larson had successfully recaptured half of the original copyright to the Man of Steel. The door will open in 2013 for Shuster’s estate to do the same. (Last month Toberoff asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to determine exactly what elements from Superman’s mythology his clients can reclaim as a result of the 2008 decision.)

The tone and tactics of the dispute were the subject of a letter written in December by Joanne Siegel to Time Warner Chairman Jeffrey L. Bewkes, just two months before her death.

Superman

Joanne Siegel, widow of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel, passed away on Feb. 12 with her family’s prolonged legal battle with Warner Bros. over the Man of Steel still unresolved.

Although a judge ruled in 2008 that the Siegels had successfully recaptured half of the original copyright to Superman, paving the way for the estate of co-creator Joe Shuster to do the same in 2013, Warner Bros. has continued its increasingly bitter fight for the property. In May the studio went so far as to sue the attorney representing the two families in an effort to force him to resign.

Noting the recent changes in tone and tactics, Joanne Siegel prepared a letter to Time Warner Chairman Jeffrey L. Bewkes just two months before her death asking for an end to such “mean-spirited tactics” as the lawsuit against attorney Marc Toberoff and multiple depositions of herself and daughter Laura Siegel Larson, both of whom were in poor health.

“My daughter Laura and I, as well as the Shuster estate, have done nothing more than exercise our rights under the Copyright Act,” Siegel wrote in the letter, obtained and published by Deadline. “Yet, your company has chosen to sue us and our long-time attorney for protecting our rights. [...] The solution to saving time, trouble, and expense is a change of viewpoint. Laura and I are legally owed our share of Superman profits since 1999. By paying the owed bill in full, as you pay other business bills, it would be handled as a business matter, instead of a lawsuit going into its 5th year.”

The latest turn in the case came just last week, when it was reported that Toberoff had asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to determine exactly what elements from Superman’s mythology his clients can reclaim as a result of the 2008 court ruling.

Read the full text of the letter after the break.

December 10, 2010

Jeffrey L. Bewkes
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Time Warner Inc.

Dear Jeff,

I am Joanne Siegel widow of Jerry Siegel, creator of Superboy and co-creator of Superman with Joe Shuster. It has always been my policy to be in touch with the Chairmen of the Board of your company going back to when Steve Ross formed Warner Communications.

Steve Ross knew how to take care of large vexing problems. He paid the price, whatever it was, then went on, and the company prospered. He was gracious and friendly when my late husband Jerry and I met him at a stockholders meeting after he sent Jerry, Joe, my daughter Laura and me company stock. He also phoned me to say if we needed anything I should just pick up the phone and call him. He said if he could not be reached for some reason, one of the top officers in the company, Deane Johnson, would handle things personally. Laura and I believe if Steve were alive our copyright ownership matter would have been successfully resolved long ago.

Jerry Levin was also reachable and thoughtful. He sent my husband and later me, cases of grapefruit at the holiday season. He remembered Jerry’s birthday with a Superman sculpture. When my Jerry passed away, Jerry Levin told Laura and me that we are part of the Time Warner family, part of its history. Unfortunately he retired before our rights issues were resolved. He had given his attorneys too much power so that negotiations were unsatisfactory and a settlement was impossible. Dick Parsons, on the other hand, was not friendly and, under him, the attorneys hired by the company were arrogant and pro-litigation.

Now you are Chairman and CEO. Because we are in litigation I held off writing to you. I now believe had we had contact early on, things might not have gone so far off track.

My daughter Laura and I, as well as the Shuster estate, have done nothing more than exercise our rights under the Copyright Act. Yet, your company has chosen to sue us and our long-time attorney for protecting our rights.

On December 1st I turned 93. I am old enough to be your mother. I have grown grandchildren. Unfortunately I am not in the best of health. My cardiologist provided a letter to your attorneys informing them that I suffer from a serious heart condition and that forcing me to go through yet another stressful deposition could put me in danger of a heart attack or stroke. I am also on medications that have side effects which force me to stay close to home and restrooms. Nonetheless your attorneys are forcing me to endure a second deposition even though I have already undergone a deposition for a full day in this matter. As clearly they would be covering the same ground, their intention is to harass me.

My dear daughter Laura too has painful medical conditions including multiple sclerosis, arthritis, glaucoma, spine disorders, and fibromyalgia. She has already had her deposition taken twice by your attorneys while in pain. Her doctors have given written statements saying she should not be subjected to a third deposition, yet your attorneys are insisting on re-taking her deposition in an effort to harass her as well.

So I ask you to please consider – do these mean spirited tactics meet with your approval? Do you really think the families of Superman’s creators should be treated this way?

As you know, DC and Warner Bros. have profited enormously from 72 years of exploiting Jerry and Joe’s wonderful creation. Superman is now a billion dollar franchise and has been DC’s flagship property for all this time.

As for this letter, the purpose is three-fold:

To protest harassment of us that will gain you nothing but bad blood and a continued fight.

To protest harassment of our attorney by falsely accusing him of improper conduct in an attempt to deprive us of legal counsel.

To make you aware that in reality this is a business matter and that continuing with litigation for many more years will only benefit your attorneys.

This is not just another case. The public and press are interested in Superman and us and are aware of our and your litigations.

The solution to saving time, trouble, and expense is a change of viewpoint. Laura and I are legally owed our share of Superman profits since 1999. By paying the owed bill in full, as you pay other business bills, it would be handled as a business matter, instead of a lawsuit going into its 5th year.

Even though you will no doubt pass this letter on to your attorneys, the final decision is yours. Your image as well as the company’s reputation rests on a respectable and acceptable outcome, and I hope you will get personally involved to insure this matter is handled properly.

The courtesy of a friendly and meaningful reply from you will be most appreciated.

Sincerely,
Joanne Siegel

Metro

Graphic novels | Metro, the graphic novel by Egyptian cartoonist Magdy El Shafee that was banned in 2009 under Hosni Mubarak’s regime, will be published in English next year by Metropolitan, a division of Macmillan. El Shafee who, along with his publisher Mohammed al Sharqawi was convicted of disturbing public morals, has appealed to Egypt’s new Ministry of Culture to have the ban lifted. “I’m waiting to hear if the minister of culture will allow it to be published again,” El Shafee says. “They will have to consult with the courts. I’m hoping there may be some kind of apology.” [CNN.com]

Legal | In an article that’s heavy on background and light on new information, Matthew Beloni reports that the attorney representing the heirs of Superman creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster has asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to determine exactly what elements from the Man of Steel’s mythology his clients can reclaim as a result of the 2008 court ruling. [THR, Esq.]

Retailing | Barnes & Noble stock fell 16 cents following a report that bookstore chain, the largest in the United States, will likely end its months-long search for a buyer. Although the auction isn’t over, initial interest from at least seven potential buyers is said to have waned following the first round of bidding. [Bloomberg]

Archaia

Publishing | Archaia Entertainment, which recently secured new financing, has appointed Allan Grafman, former publisher president of Archie Comics Entertainment, to its board, and hired Mike Kennedy as publisher and John Cummins as executive vice president for business and legal affairs. [press release]

Business | The recently launched Wizard World Inc. has named Michael Mathews, former CEO of interclick, inc., as chairman of the board. [press release]

Retailing | DC Comics will reportedly expand its co-op advertising program for retailers to include banners on websites and blogs that aren’t aimed at comics readers. [Bleeding Cool]

Conventions | Heidi MacDonald provides an overview of last weekend’s second annual Chicago Comic & Entertainment Expo, while Brigid Alverson rounds up convention news about comics for kids and teens. [Publishers Weekly]

Super Dinosaur

Creators | Robert Kirkman talks about his newest projects, Super Dinosaur and The Infinite, and his Skybound imprint. [Publishers Weekly]

Creators | Terry Moore chats briefly about Strangers in Paradise, Echo, and the comics industry: “When I got in (the comic book industry in) 1993, it had no resemblance to the way it is now — none. Nothing about the business was the same: the fans, the way it works, what kind of comics came out, how they came out, how big and how much money was in the business. Now, I feel like we’re watching the death of an industry in terms of evolution, like we’re switching from being one way to a new way, you know? When you do that, you have to burn the bird and get the phoenix out of it. So I feel like we’re transitioning from the Industrial Age to the Space Age. It’s like everybody is lamenting the loss of the railroad, but hey man, now we have airplanes.” [Arizona Daily Wildcat]

Creators | Matt Adams spotlights Paul Cornell, focusing primarily for his work on DC’s Action Comics. [Herts Advertiser]

Creators | Michael Cavna profiles Sarah Glidden, creator of How to Understand Israel in 60 Days or Less. [The Washington Post]

Creators | Mike Rhode talks with cartoonists Shawn Belschwender and Mike Shapiro. [Washington City Paper]

Comic Book Comics, by Ryan Dunlavey and Fred Van Lente, chronicles the history of comics in comic-book form. Their latest story, posted in full at their blog, is a short history of copyright grabs by comics publishers, featuring Superman creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster. Jack Kirby and Joker creator Jerry Robinson make appearances as well. It’s interesting history and a painless way to learn a bit about copyright law and its pitfalls.

(Via Comics Worth Reading.)

Superman

The ferocious fight for the future of Superman has been put on hold while a federal judge considers an appeal on a procedural ruling.

THR, Esq. reports that U.S. District Judge Otis D. Wright issued the stay on Friday, on the eve of a scheduled hearing concerning Warner Bros.’ lawsuit against Marc Toberoff, attorney for the heirs of Superman co-creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster.

The studio sued Toberoff in May in a move designed to force him to resign as the lawyer for Siegel’s heirs, who in 2008 successfully terminated the original 1938 transfer of copyright for Action Comics #1. The 65-page complaint accused Toberoff of manipulating the Siegel family and the estate of Joe Shuster into rejecting “mutually beneficial” longtime agreements with DC Comics, and making arrangements that would give him “a controlling financial interest in the families’ collective claims.” Toberoff responded by accusing Warner Bros. of conducting “a smear campaign,” and in August filed motions to dismiss, citing California anti-SLAPP laws designed to curb lawsuits intended to intimidate the opposition through delays and legal expense.

In late September, attorneys for Warner Bros. filed five separate motions in an effort to keep its lawsuit alive, amending its complaint and accusing Toberoff of attempting to shield himself from liability for interfering with his clients’ contracts. The changes to the studio’s suit led Toberoff to file his motions again. However, Wright ruled the anti-SLAPP motion moot due to the amended complaint. Toberoff appealed that ruling, which brings us to the stay of the entire case.

THR, Esq. notes that Warner Bros.’ aggressive and controversial litigation against Toberoff could be on hold for as long as 18 months; the studio, however, could speed up the process by filing a motion to dismiss the appeal.

Meanwhile, Warner Bros. pushes forward with its Zack Snyder-directed Superman reboot, which must begin production by 2011 or risk opening the door for Siegel’s heirs to bring action over the lack of a rights-reversion clause in the studio’s deal with DC Comics. Of course, another bigger deadline looms just over the horizon: In 2013, the Shuster estate will be eligible to reclaim its half of the copyright.

Superman

Warner Bros. has filed another round of motions in its increasingly nasty legal battle with the families of Superman’s creators, and their attorney Marc Toberoff.

The studio sued Toberoff in May in a move designed to force him to resign as the lawyer for the heirs of Jerry Siegel, who in 2008 successfully terminated the original 1938 transfer of copyright for Action Comics #1. The 65-page complaint accused Toberoff of manipulating the Siegel family and the estate of Joe Shuster into rejecting “mutually beneficial” longtime agreements with DC Comics, and making arrangements that would give him “a controlling financial interest in the families’ collective claims.” Toberoff responded by accusing Warner Bros. of conducting “a smear campaign,” and in August filed motions to dismiss, citing California laws designed to curb lawsuits intended to intimidate the opposition through delays and legal expense.

Now, The Hollywood Reporter’s THR, Esq. blog reports, Warner Bros. has filed five separate motions in an effort to keep its lawsuit alive. The studio, represented by Dan Petrocelli — he successfully defended The Walt Disney Co. in a lengthy battle over merchandising royalties from Winnie-the-Pooh — and a team from O’Melveny & Myers, claims Toberoff is attempting to shield himself from liability for interfering with his clients’ contracts.

A hearing is scheduled for Oct. 18.

Action Comics #1

Marc Toberoff, the attorney representing the heirs of Superman’s co-creators, has responded to a lawsuit filed against him on Friday by DC Comics, calling it “baseless” and “clearly vindictive.”

The 56-page complaint, designed to discredit Warner Bros.’ legal nemesis, alleges that Toberoff “orchestrated a web of collusive agreements” with the heirs of Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, leading them to reject “mutually beneficial” longtime deals with DC Comics and seek to recapture the Superman copyright.

Further, the lawsuit charges that Toberoff’s “scheme” is designed to secure for him “a majority and controlling financial stake” in the Superman rights and “preclude the heirs from freely entering into new agreements with DC Comics for the continued exploitation of Superman.”

In a press release issued Friday evening, Toberoff accuses Warner Bros. and DC of resorting to “a smear campaign disguised as a lawsuit.”

“Even before filing their new lawsuit, Warner Bros.’ press machine embarked on a well-coordinated campaign to assassinate Mr. Toberoff’s character,” the statement reads. “The baseless lawsuit and press campaign are clearly vindictive, given that Mr. Toberoff has handled a string of successful rights claims against Warner, including securing a preliminary injunction barring Warner’s infringing The Dukes of Hazzard movie in 2005.”

Toberoff dismisses claims that he has a “financial stake” in the Superman and Superboy lawsuits, and insists his only interest is “a proper contingent legal fee.”

“Warner and [new outside counsel Daniel] Petrocelli are aware that the frivolous allegations in their complaint do not add up and will never pass muster in the federal courts,” Toberoff continues. “However, that’s not the point of their lawsuit. Warner and Petrocelli’s objective is to ‘muddy the waters’ by attacking Mr. Toberoff, potentially conflict him out of the case, and thereby strong-arm the Siegels and Shusters into selling at a cut-rate price the copyrights they have legitimately recaptured. Such unethical tactics are nothing short of deplorable.”

The lawsuit relies heavily on a seven-page cover letter — the “Superman-Marc Toberoff Timeline is attached to the complaint — sent anonymously to Warner Bros. in December 2008 along with confidential documents that Toberoff claims were “brazenly stolen” from his office. According to the Los Angeles Times, a court ruled the documents were privileged, and within 24 hours the studio turned them over to a court officer. However, the cover letter was not deemed privileged. Toberoff characterizes it as a defamatory, inadmissible “hyperbolic rant.”