you... can read the article from which you pasted this, you know? It explains it pretty well:
The DC characters are the next major expirations looming on the horizon. Superman and Lois Lane will enter the public domain in 2034, followed by Batman in 2035, the Joker in 2036 and Wonder Woman in 2037.
Chris Sims, a comic book author and Batman expert, expects a flood of unauthorized Batman comics to hit the stands as soon as the copyright expires.
“There’s going to be 100 of them,” he says. “They’re going to have them ready to go.” Movie producers will also be able to make their own versions — much as they already do with public domain characters like Dracula and Robin Hood — though in the beginning they will have to stick to the original versions of the characters.
“You get Batman, but you don’t get Robin,” Sims says. “You get Superman, but you don’t get kryptonite.”
The initial Superman could only leap — not fly. “Those characteristics are going to fall into the public domain one by one,” says Amanda Schreyer, media and entertainment lawyer at Morse.
DC has been preparing for this for years. At a press event in 2023, CEO James Gunn noted that the next Superman film will introduce characters from “The Authority,” a comic series that launched in 1999, in part because the Superman copyright is about to expire.
Jay Kogan, DC’s deputy general counsel, laid out a strategy to protect characters that fall into the public domain in a 2001 article. Since only the older versions lose protection, he urged: “Keep ’em fresh and up-to-date.”
“By gradually changing the literary and visual characteristics of a character over time, a character owner can keep whatever the then-current image of the character is as the de facto standard in the public consciousness,” he wrote.
The company has done a good job of updating Superman, argues Steven Beer, an IP lawyer at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith.
“The public’s perception is the contemporary Superman. It’s distinctive,” he says. “That gives them a lot of protection.”
Another tactic: Maintain a high level of quality control.
“The public should be conditioned to view any works from unrelated parties featuring a trademark owner’s characters as second-rate knockoffs,” Kogan wrote.
Kogan also suggested that trademarks could be used to block the use of a character’s name, image and slogan even after the copyright expires.
But trademark is not a cloak of immunity, argues Jennifer Jenkins, director of Duke’s Center for the Study of the Public Domain. “That only prevents uses that are likely to cause consumer confusion about source or sponsorship,” she says.
In other words, the characters’ names should be fair game, so long as it’s clear that the depiction is not coming from DC.
“You could still create a Superman horror movie or Batman horror movie,” says Jonathan Steinsapir, an IP attorney at KHIKS. “You just need to be careful about how you advertise it and how you use images of Superman in a branding sense.”
DC has done a careful job of tying the characters to itself by trademarking the terms “Man of Steel” and “Caped Crusader,” as well as Superman’s “S” and Batman’s logo.
“The bat symbol is a very strong mark,” Schreyer says. “That is going to limit what subsequent creators can do.”
Even so, expect the mid-2030s to see a glut of off-brand superhero content.
“People will make a run at these characters because there’s money to be made,” says Mark Waid, a comic book author and historian best known for his work on DC Comics titles like “Superman: Birthright.” “Or how about Superman versus Godzilla. It’s a gray area. But this town works on the speed of capitalism, right? That’s how we work.”
Sims believes more superhero comics will be a good thing. But the idea that there will be a Superman renaissance is oversold, he says.
“It’s gonna come down to execution,” Sims says. “There’s one company that’s used to doing it.”
But trademark is not a cloak of immunity, argues Jennifer Jenkins, director of Duke’s Center for the Study of the Public Domain. “That only prevents uses that are likely to cause consumer confusion about source or sponsorship,” she says.
In other words, the characters’ names should be fair game, so long as it’s clear that the depiction is not coming from DC.
“You could still create a Superman horror movie or Batman horror movie,” says Jonathan Steinsapir, an IP attorney at KHIKS. “You just need to be careful about how you advertise it and how you use images of Superman in a branding sense.”
DC has done a careful job of tying the characters to itself by trademarking the terms “Man of Steel” and “Caped Crusader,” as well as Superman’s “S” and Batman’s logo.
“The bat symbol is a very strong mark,” Schreyer says. “That is going to limit what subsequent creators can do.”
Even so, expect the mid-2030s to see a glut of off-brand superhero content.
“People will make a run at these characters because there’s money to be made,” says Mark Waid, a comic book author and historian best known for his work on DC Comics titles like “Superman: Birthright.” “Or how about Superman versus Godzilla. It’s a gray area. But this town works on the speed of capitalism, right? That’s how we work.”
Sims believes more superhero comics will be a good thing. But the idea that there will be a Superman renaissance is oversold, he says.
“It’s gonna come down to execution,” Sims says. “There’s one company that’s used to doing it.”
there's a million fricking S logos and Bat symbols, the only ones going public are purple gloves batman with a gun and teeny weeny bat symbol and triangle shield Superman.
There's essentially no way to use the golden age versions and change them up without already violating some dumb shit DC already did in the 40's and beyond.
For example the earliest these versions can go into public domain is 2043
I believe the most important part that goes into the public domain are the NAMEs of the characters. You can easily make up your own similar-but-legally-distinct costume, the important bit is that you can legally call the resulting character Superman or Batman.
>there's a million fricking S logos and Bat symbols,
The S logo that DC is most interested in maintaining as a trademark is the "Classic" one that's been in use for decades. The Bat logo DC may be most interested in maintaining is the yellow oval one. Batman mainly got a yellow oval symbol so it would be easier to trademark.
>DC’s in-house attorney, Bernie Kashdan, explained to me in 1974 that the addition of the yellow circle was motivated by DC’s need to trade-mark Batman’s chest symbol for merchandising, et al, to come. The legal opinion was that the simple drawing of a black bat was insufficient then for trade-markable protection. The legal opinion was that the addition of the yellow circle would give them a readily protectable mark they could secure.
What doesn't? Basically they're going to make a very specific list of features of public domain Superman, and a list of Superman features which were introduced post-PD era Supe, so they will be prepared to sue anybody who tries ro make an unapproved Superman product which features any non-PD era Superman features. >oh your Superman movie has a flying Superman? Well sorry, that feature isn't yet in the public domain
In short, trying to make anything with PD Superman will ultimately be so risky and likely unrewarding that most still won't bother. Like with Steamboat Willy Mickey, all you'll see are fanmade-tier productions and/or total garbage, not a sudden wave if A+ studios producing their own takes on Superman.
Steamboat Willie has been in the public domain for 17 days, not nearly enough time to make anything high-quality or worthwhile with the character, while the easiest horror shit is so easy and generic to make it's done in an instant. It's also the first time a major film character like this has elements in the PD
In other words give it time, eventually you'll get some good adaptions
Steamboat Willie has been in the public domain for 17 days, not nearly enough time to make anything high-quality or worthwhile with the character, while the easiest horror shit is so easy and generic to make it's done in an instant. It's also the first time a major film character like this has elements in the PD
In other words give it time, eventually you'll get some good adaptions
the only stuff made with mickey was essentially fair use comedy shit anyway except for that one stupid horror game
I still don't get why it has to be the authority and the movie wont be protected just by the fact it will be a new version of superman (or could have original characters) that will be from 2025.
Wouldn't it be better for them to not make a list so they could sue basically anyone?
>and a list of Superman features which were introduced post-PD era Supe, so they will be prepared to sue anybody who tries ro make an unapproved Superman product which features any non-PD era Superman features.
Wow not even Disney went as far as making a fricking list, pretty pathetic.
It's curious that, of all characters, it's Wonder Woman that is going to have pretty much all the stuff commonly associated with the character go into public domain right from the start, even though people keep saying she's reinvented so much >The costume, pretty much unchanged >Paradise Island >The Amazons >The greek gods >The bracelets, the lasso of truth >The invisible plane >Steve Trevor >Etta Candy
I'm talking Wonder Woman, which all the old stuff now is viewed through the prism of Moulton as person and his lifestyle, she's tied to creator in a way unlike the others.
Superman and Batman are mundane guy beats up mobsters, that always works.
Only hardcore comic nerd historians know of him. Everyone else just thinks bullets and bracelets, which is here from the start. Marston isn't even clickbait fodder for normies.
Oh no, are we gonna be stuck with 90's WW? or Artemis WW? or dare I say it? PANTS?!
3 months ago
Anonymous
No PD WW will be an an examination of her relationship with Etta Candy and Steve Trevor and put them in a poly relationship since WW was based on Moulton and his wife's live in girlfriend
3 months ago
Anonymous
I meant in DC, PD can go any which way, I'm sure someone will try and expand on her clay origins and try to incorporate modding her body and whatnot.
>you clearly don't know lawyers and how they'll argue you were influenced and lifted copy written works
YOU don't know what you're talking about
"Batman stops a crime at a zoo" is not the copyrighted part because it's a generic idea
That panel you posted came from a story where Batman's trying to solve a murder mystery at a safari/zoo area on a millionaire's estate
If you're doing a story where Batman goes to a millionaire's mansion with a safari in the back and has to solve a murder mystery then you're wading into troubled waters
batman stopping crime is fine, but the setting and nature can't be so similar to works not yet in public domain.
>there's a million fricking S logos and Bat symbols,
The S logo that DC is most interested in maintaining as a trademark is the "Classic" one that's been in use for decades. The Bat logo DC may be most interested in maintaining is the yellow oval one. Batman mainly got a yellow oval symbol so it would be easier to trademark.
>DC’s in-house attorney, Bernie Kashdan, explained to me in 1974 that the addition of the yellow circle was motivated by DC’s need to trade-mark Batman’s chest symbol for merchandising, et al, to come. The legal opinion was that the simple drawing of a black bat was insufficient then for trade-markable protection. The legal opinion was that the addition of the yellow circle would give them a readily protectable mark they could secure.
Then there's these two with this design that aren't the golden age versions exactly but they're extremely close
Jay Kogan, DC’s deputy general counsel, laid out a strategy to protect characters that fall into the public domain in a 2001 article. Since only the older versions lose protection, he urged: “Keep ’em fresh and up-to-date.”
“By gradually changing the literary and visual characteristics of a character over time, a character owner can keep whatever the then-current image of the character is as the de facto standard in the public consciousness,” he wrote.
The company has done a good job of updating Superman, argues Steven Beer, an IP lawyer at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith.
“The public’s perception is the contemporary Superman. It’s distinctive,” he says. “That gives them a lot of protection.”
Another tactic: Maintain a high level of quality control.
“The public should be conditioned to view any works from unrelated parties featuring a trademark owner’s characters as second-rate knockoffs,” Kogan wrote.
Kogan also suggested that trademarks could be used to block the use of a character’s name, image and slogan even after the copyright expires.
But trademark is not a cloak of immunity, argues Jennifer Jenkins, director of Duke’s Center for the Study of the Public Domain. “That only prevents uses that are likely to cause consumer confusion about source or sponsorship,” she says.
In other words, the characters’ names should be fair game, so long as it’s clear that the depiction is not coming from DC.
“You could still create a Superman horror movie or Batman horror movie,” says Jonathan Steinsapir, an IP attorney at KHIKS. “You just need to be careful about how you advertise it and how you use images of Superman in a branding sense.”
DC has done a careful job of tying the characters to itself by trademarking the terms “Man of Steel” and “Caped Crusader,” as well as Superman’s “S” and Batman’s logo.
“The bat symbol is a very strong mark,” Schreyer says. “That is going to limit what subsequent creators can do.”
Even so, expect the mid-2030s to see a glut of off-brand superhero content.
“People will make a run at these characters because there’s money to be made,” says Mark Waid, a comic book author and historian best known for his work on DC Comics titles like “Superman: Birthright.” “Or how about Superman versus Godzilla. It’s a gray area. But this town works on the speed of capitalism, right? That’s how we work.”
Sims believes more superhero comics will be a good thing. But the idea that there will be a Superman renaissance is oversold, he says.
“It’s gonna come down to execution,” Sims says. “There’s one company that’s used to doing it.”
In 2034 the first year of Superman comics goes PD in the US. This is like the first six or seven issues of Action Comics. There is also the matter of the Fleischer cartoons already PD and the first months of the 1939 comic strip possibly being already PD because of the wrong copyright notices.
Having Superman in the films interact/connect with The Authority means they have another story element that people can't use when Superman goes public domain, because The Authority were characters introduced in the 90s, and it'd be a long time till they become public domain.
There were also other story elements to Superman introduced over the decades that can't be used yet because they were introduced in subsequent years (ie Smallville, Luthor, Luthor being called Lex, etc)
>Superman >fresh and up to date
nope
[...]
there's a million fricking S logos and Bat symbols, the only ones going public are purple gloves batman with a gun and teeny weeny bat symbol and triangle shield Superman.
There's essentially no way to use the golden age versions and change them up without already violating some dumb shit DC already did in the 40's and beyond.
For example the earliest these versions can go into public domain is 2043
Note: Batman with "no Robin", purple gloves, weird suit, limited villains, etc. isnt actually that big a problem for public domain use, that shit all goes public a year later. Even then, pic related was 1939, so you can still have a 99% classic Batman before Batman #1 goes public a year later alongside Joker and Robin. Everything you need for an iconic, classic Batman story follows him in a year.
Superman is the safest, ironically. Wonder Woman is the most fricked since she's tied to Greek Myth, and Batman is right next to her. Superman as we know him today will take until the late 2050's to be fully available, if not longer for more of the modern take like Smallville being in Kansas, etc.
Damn near everything iconically Batman is introduced in 1940-1943.
In 2034 the first year of Superman comics goes PD in the US. This is like the first six or seven issues of Action Comics. There is also the matter of the Fleischer cartoons already PD and the first months of the 1939 comic strip possibly being already PD because of the wrong copyright notices.
Having Superman in the films interact/connect with The Authority means they have another story element that people can't use when Superman goes public domain, because The Authority were characters introduced in the 90s, and it'd be a long time till they become public domain.
There were also other story elements to Superman introduced over the decades that can't be used yet because they were introduced in subsequent years (ie Smallville, Luthor, Luthor being called Lex, etc)
>Public Domain Superman
You thought Evil Superman was overplayed before? Wait until all the soulless, unoriginal horror filmmakers get their hands on him the second he goes public.
horror superman already exists and is under copyright, there's so many fricking version of Superman and Batman just from the insane nonsense of the silver age that you actually can't do an original take on the characters. You would have to use the golden age versions
>Why would they need to prepare for this?
Because in 10 years Superman, Batman, and Wonder Soman become public domain.
Which is why they keep trying to push the minority replacements so hard.
They’re on a very, very short schedule until they lose their money makers.
Wait a minute >article says DC has been preparing for years >James Gunn is now overseeing DC films >James Gunn did Horror Superman for WB before he chosen to oversee DC films
>why they need to prepare for this?
Without the arbitrary barrier of copyright, they'll actually need to put out quality product now if they want to keep making money, kek.
That's why it's gonna be hilarious
Someone is inevitably gonna frick up and copy something that Garth Ennis or Mark Waid or Pat MIlls or Tom Taylor or James Gunn did
Batman Public Domain Y1 >Batman >Commissioner Gordon >Mad Monk >Doctor Death >Unnamed mugger who kills the Waynes
Public Domain Y2 >Robin >Joker >Catwoman >Hugo Strange
Public Domain Y3 >Scarecrow >Penguin
Public Domain Y4 >Maroni >Two-Face
Honestly, I am more happy about Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel going public domain soon.
A lot of their early stories could use a "same thing but told better-esque update", and DC isnt doing it while they keep churning Batman and Superman AUs.
you... can read the article from which you pasted this, you know? It explains it pretty well:
The DC characters are the next major expirations looming on the horizon. Superman and Lois Lane will enter the public domain in 2034, followed by Batman in 2035, the Joker in 2036 and Wonder Woman in 2037.
Chris Sims, a comic book author and Batman expert, expects a flood of unauthorized Batman comics to hit the stands as soon as the copyright expires.
“There’s going to be 100 of them,” he says. “They’re going to have them ready to go.” Movie producers will also be able to make their own versions — much as they already do with public domain characters like Dracula and Robin Hood — though in the beginning they will have to stick to the original versions of the characters.
“You get Batman, but you don’t get Robin,” Sims says. “You get Superman, but you don’t get kryptonite.”
The initial Superman could only leap — not fly. “Those characteristics are going to fall into the public domain one by one,” says Amanda Schreyer, media and entertainment lawyer at Morse.
DC has been preparing for this for years. At a press event in 2023, CEO James Gunn noted that the next Superman film will introduce characters from “The Authority,” a comic series that launched in 1999, in part because the Superman copyright is about to expire.
Jay Kogan, DC’s deputy general counsel, laid out a strategy to protect characters that fall into the public domain in a 2001 article. Since only the older versions lose protection, he urged: “Keep ’em fresh and up-to-date.”
“By gradually changing the literary and visual characteristics of a character over time, a character owner can keep whatever the then-current image of the character is as the de facto standard in the public consciousness,” he wrote.
The company has done a good job of updating Superman, argues Steven Beer, an IP lawyer at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith.
“The public’s perception is the contemporary Superman. It’s distinctive,” he says. “That gives them a lot of protection.”
Another tactic: Maintain a high level of quality control.
“The public should be conditioned to view any works from unrelated parties featuring a trademark owner’s characters as second-rate knockoffs,” Kogan wrote.
Kogan also suggested that trademarks could be used to block the use of a character’s name, image and slogan even after the copyright expires.
But trademark is not a cloak of immunity, argues Jennifer Jenkins, director of Duke’s Center for the Study of the Public Domain. “That only prevents uses that are likely to cause consumer confusion about source or sponsorship,” she says.
In other words, the characters’ names should be fair game, so long as it’s clear that the depiction is not coming from DC.
“You could still create a Superman horror movie or Batman horror movie,” says Jonathan Steinsapir, an IP attorney at KHIKS. “You just need to be careful about how you advertise it and how you use images of Superman in a branding sense.”
DC has done a careful job of tying the characters to itself by trademarking the terms “Man of Steel” and “Caped Crusader,” as well as Superman’s “S” and Batman’s logo.
“The bat symbol is a very strong mark,” Schreyer says. “That is going to limit what subsequent creators can do.”
Even so, expect the mid-2030s to see a glut of off-brand superhero content.
“People will make a run at these characters because there’s money to be made,” says Mark Waid, a comic book author and historian best known for his work on DC Comics titles like “Superman: Birthright.” “Or how about Superman versus Godzilla. It’s a gray area. But this town works on the speed of capitalism, right? That’s how we work.”
Sims believes more superhero comics will be a good thing. But the idea that there will be a Superman renaissance is oversold, he says.
“It’s gonna come down to execution,” Sims says. “There’s one company that’s used to doing it.”
>Or how about Superman versus Godzilla
DC just did that Mark.
The article came out today though.
And the crossover's been going for four months now.
>Superman
>fresh and up to date
nope
there's a million fricking S logos and Bat symbols, the only ones going public are purple gloves batman with a gun and teeny weeny bat symbol and triangle shield Superman.
There's essentially no way to use the golden age versions and change them up without already violating some dumb shit DC already did in the 40's and beyond.
For example the earliest these versions can go into public domain is 2043
I believe the most important part that goes into the public domain are the NAMEs of the characters. You can easily make up your own similar-but-legally-distinct costume, the important bit is that you can legally call the resulting character Superman or Batman.
names and costumes, plus settings and characters, lore, etc.
wanna have your Batman be grounded and stop street level shit like someone's attacking a Zoo? Nope already been done.
>wanna have your Batman be grounded and stop street level shit like someone's attacking a Zoo? Nope already been done.
That's not how it works. Batman can stop a person attacking a zoo, it just can't go exactly the way it did in a still-copyrighted story.
You can have your Batman fight the occult though
>there's a million fricking S logos and Bat symbols,
The S logo that DC is most interested in maintaining as a trademark is the "Classic" one that's been in use for decades. The Bat logo DC may be most interested in maintaining is the yellow oval one. Batman mainly got a yellow oval symbol so it would be easier to trademark.
https://batman-on-film.com/4263/history_batman-yellow-oval-why-how_m-uslan_9-13-18/
>DC’s in-house attorney, Bernie Kashdan, explained to me in 1974 that the addition of the yellow circle was motivated by DC’s need to trade-mark Batman’s chest symbol for merchandising, et al, to come. The legal opinion was that the simple drawing of a black bat was insufficient then for trade-markable protection. The legal opinion was that the addition of the yellow circle would give them a readily protectable mark they could secure.
forgot my pic
>Another tactic: Maintain a high level of quality control.
DC is fricked.
I don’t get it. It doesn’t make sense.
What doesn't? Basically they're going to make a very specific list of features of public domain Superman, and a list of Superman features which were introduced post-PD era Supe, so they will be prepared to sue anybody who tries ro make an unapproved Superman product which features any non-PD era Superman features.
>oh your Superman movie has a flying Superman? Well sorry, that feature isn't yet in the public domain
In short, trying to make anything with PD Superman will ultimately be so risky and likely unrewarding that most still won't bother. Like with Steamboat Willy Mickey, all you'll see are fanmade-tier productions and/or total garbage, not a sudden wave if A+ studios producing their own takes on Superman.
Steamboat Willie has been in the public domain for 17 days, not nearly enough time to make anything high-quality or worthwhile with the character, while the easiest horror shit is so easy and generic to make it's done in an instant. It's also the first time a major film character like this has elements in the PD
In other words give it time, eventually you'll get some good adaptions
the only stuff made with mickey was essentially fair use comedy shit anyway except for that one stupid horror game
I still don't get why it has to be the authority and the movie wont be protected just by the fact it will be a new version of superman (or could have original characters) that will be from 2025.
Wouldn't it be better for them to not make a list so they could sue basically anyone?
agree authority is stupid, should have been Intergang, list is probably internal
>and a list of Superman features which were introduced post-PD era Supe, so they will be prepared to sue anybody who tries ro make an unapproved Superman product which features any non-PD era Superman features.
Wow not even Disney went as far as making a fricking list, pretty pathetic.
DC has always been full of greedy homosexuals and it only got worse after they were taken by WB.
Whiz Comics should be enough of a reminder.
They are trying to limit what Superman shit can be used
It's curious that, of all characters, it's Wonder Woman that is going to have pretty much all the stuff commonly associated with the character go into public domain right from the start, even though people keep saying she's reinvented so much
>The costume, pretty much unchanged
>Paradise Island
>The Amazons
>The greek gods
>The bracelets, the lasso of truth
>The invisible plane
>Steve Trevor
>Etta Candy
The early stuff is too bizarre for anyone to really do anything of note with.
Anyone who really cares about public domain is creatively bankrupt and will just make generic horror movies with insert this PD character here.
Real golden age Superman is just an unbelievably strong guy that stops domestic terrorism, but he has no weaknesses.
you clearly don't know lawyers and how they'll argue you were influenced and lifted copy written works
I'm talking Wonder Woman, which all the old stuff now is viewed through the prism of Moulton as person and his lifestyle, she's tied to creator in a way unlike the others.
Superman and Batman are mundane guy beats up mobsters, that always works.
Only hardcore comic nerd historians know of him. Everyone else just thinks bullets and bracelets, which is here from the start. Marston isn't even clickbait fodder for normies.
Oh no, are we gonna be stuck with 90's WW? or Artemis WW? or dare I say it? PANTS?!
No PD WW will be an an examination of her relationship with Etta Candy and Steve Trevor and put them in a poly relationship since WW was based on Moulton and his wife's live in girlfriend
I meant in DC, PD can go any which way, I'm sure someone will try and expand on her clay origins and try to incorporate modding her body and whatnot.
DC already did it with the god awful Zeus retcon
>you clearly don't know lawyers and how they'll argue you were influenced and lifted copy written works
YOU don't know what you're talking about
"Batman stops a crime at a zoo" is not the copyrighted part because it's a generic idea
That panel you posted came from a story where Batman's trying to solve a murder mystery at a safari/zoo area on a millionaire's estate
If you're doing a story where Batman goes to a millionaire's mansion with a safari in the back and has to solve a murder mystery then you're wading into troubled waters
batman stopping crime is fine, but the setting and nature can't be so similar to works not yet in public domain.
Then there's these two with this design that aren't the golden age versions exactly but they're extremely close
Note: Batman with "no Robin", purple gloves, weird suit, limited villains, etc. isnt actually that big a problem for public domain use, that shit all goes public a year later. Even then, pic related was 1939, so you can still have a 99% classic Batman before Batman #1 goes public a year later alongside Joker and Robin. Everything you need for an iconic, classic Batman story follows him in a year.
Superman is the safest, ironically. Wonder Woman is the most fricked since she's tied to Greek Myth, and Batman is right next to her. Superman as we know him today will take until the late 2050's to be fully available, if not longer for more of the modern take like Smallville being in Kansas, etc.
Damn near everything iconically Batman is introduced in 1940-1943.
speaking of 1939, Billy can finally get some good books again.
I mean his first appearance is already public domain, it's just some of his comics are public domain and some aren't, but not in a consecutive order
Not his iconic robot hand.
>Chris Sims, a comic book author and Batman expert
In 2034 the first year of Superman comics goes PD in the US. This is like the first six or seven issues of Action Comics. There is also the matter of the Fleischer cartoons already PD and the first months of the 1939 comic strip possibly being already PD because of the wrong copyright notices.
Having Superman in the films interact/connect with The Authority means they have another story element that people can't use when Superman goes public domain, because The Authority were characters introduced in the 90s, and it'd be a long time till they become public domain.
There were also other story elements to Superman introduced over the decades that can't be used yet because they were introduced in subsequent years (ie Smallville, Luthor, Luthor being called Lex, etc)
>Public Domain Superman
You thought Evil Superman was overplayed before? Wait until all the soulless, unoriginal horror filmmakers get their hands on him the second he goes public.
I got out of reading full time while the getting was good. It's today's kids I worry about. They'll be the gen that sees a drunken rape 'n kill Supes.
horror superman already exists and is under copyright, there's so many fricking version of Superman and Batman just from the insane nonsense of the silver age that you actually can't do an original take on the characters. You would have to use the golden age versions
>Wait until all the soulless, unoriginal horror filmmakers get their hands on him
like now?
>Why would they need to prepare for this?
Because in 10 years Superman, Batman, and Wonder Soman become public domain.
Which is why they keep trying to push the minority replacements so hard.
They’re on a very, very short schedule until they lose their money makers.
DC is permanently dead as we've known it.
I remember 2010 Cinemaphile being moronic enough to think anything good would come of this
But Anon! Now they will be able to publish their shitty fanfictions and get super-rich!
>It's Batman! But This Time He's Personable
I'm doing a nazi superman comic the minute he's free
Promise it will be better than the last 20 years of gay shit
I'm sure today's kids will go wild for it.
they already made the crappy horror parody of superman, though
Wait a minute
>article says DC has been preparing for years
>James Gunn is now overseeing DC films
>James Gunn did Horror Superman for WB before he chosen to oversee DC films
>why they need to prepare for this?
Without the arbitrary barrier of copyright, they'll actually need to put out quality product now if they want to keep making money, kek.
>yfw Disney and WB can't just shit out the same old IP for another 50 years.
But there are already plenty of non-DC Superman that are either edgy or evil.
That's why it's gonna be hilarious
Someone is inevitably gonna frick up and copy something that Garth Ennis or Mark Waid or Pat MIlls or Tom Taylor or James Gunn did
Batman Public Domain Y1
>Batman
>Commissioner Gordon
>Mad Monk
>Doctor Death
>Unnamed mugger who kills the Waynes
Public Domain Y2
>Robin
>Joker
>Catwoman
>Hugo Strange
Public Domain Y3
>Scarecrow
>Penguin
Public Domain Y4
>Maroni
>Two-Face
This will be awesome.
You won't really be able to do a proper Catwoman for another 80 years.
and Fu Manchu
Honestly, I am more happy about Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel going public domain soon.
A lot of their early stories could use a "same thing but told better-esque update", and DC isnt doing it while they keep churning Batman and Superman AUs.
>and Captain Marvel going public domain soon.
He generally is already
When WB asked the public domain comic sites to take down any Captain Marvel comic that was still copyrighted, Whiz Comics #2 wasn't one of them
Whiz Comics #2 was his first appearance and origin, along with Sivana's