Comments on: Superboy Ownership http://comicsworthreading.com/2006/04/20/superboy-ownership/ Independent Opinions on Comics of All Kinds Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:49:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: James Schee http://comicsworthreading.com/2006/04/20/superboy-ownership/comment-page-1/#comment-2136 James Schee Sat, 22 Apr 2006 00:18:45 +0000 http://www.comicsworthreading.com/2006/04/20/superboy-ownership/#comment-2136 Am I the only one that finds it really bizarre that you can have a character with the same name, look, powers and the like. Yet is considered different because one is older and the other is younger? I'm rooting for the Siegals don't get me wrong, I just find it a strange twist in the law. Am I the only one that finds it really bizarre that you can have a character with the same name, look, powers and the like. Yet is considered different because one is older and the other is younger?

I’m rooting for the Siegals don’t get me wrong, I just find it a strange twist in the law.

]]> By: Michael Grabois http://comicsworthreading.com/2006/04/20/superboy-ownership/comment-page-1/#comment-2117 Michael Grabois Fri, 21 Apr 2006 05:17:47 +0000 http://www.comicsworthreading.com/2006/04/20/superboy-ownership/#comment-2117 A small but important quibble.... the judge did not rule that "Smallville" is about Superboy. He ruled that the show <i>MAY</i> be infringing on the copyright, but that would have to go to a separate trial. From the Newsarama article: "The ruling came at the Siegel's request when they filed for a partial summary judgment, rather than a ruling on copyright infringement, which Lew said in his ruling would call for a "detailed factual comparison." Lew did agree that there had been enough facts presented to the court to convince it that the lead character in Smallville is, in fact, Superboy." The judge ruled that <i>he</i> was convinced, but he's not the court that needs to be convinced for the infringement case. He was only deciding who the rights belong to. A small but important quibble…. the judge did not rule that “Smallville” is about Superboy. He ruled that the show MAY be infringing on the copyright, but that would have to go to a separate trial.

From the Newsarama article: “The ruling came at the Siegel’s request when they filed for a partial summary judgment, rather than a ruling on copyright infringement, which Lew said in his ruling would call for a “detailed factual comparison.” Lew did agree that there had been enough facts presented to the court to convince it that the lead character in Smallville is, in fact, Superboy.”

The judge ruled that he was convinced, but he’s not the court that needs to be convinced for the infringement case. He was only deciding who the rights belong to.

]]>