Is this a good thing or a bad thing? In case you hadn't heard, a lawsuit has been going on between the heirs of Superman co-creator, Jerry Siegel and Warner Bros. & DC Comics. What it came down to is the heirs felt they weren't getting their fair share of the profits off of the TV rights for Smallville and Superman Returns. (You can read more about the lawsuit details HERE).
Today (Wednesday) U.S. District Court Judge Stephen G. Larson found that the heirs can only seek profits only from DC Comics (who earned 13.6 million from Superman Returns) and not Warner Bros. as well. The heirs felt that Warner Bros. had made "sweetheart deals" with DC. The judge ruled that the terms were at fair market value.
What is interesting is it's noted that Warner Bros. chairman Alan Horn testified that they want to make another Superman movie. The problem is a movie isn't currently under development and they don't even have a script. The earliest he sees a movie happening is 2012. It would be in Warner Bros. best interest to get that movie made by 2012. In 2013, the Siegel and Shuster heirs will own the entire Superman copyright. If Warners wants to make a movie after 2013, they'll have to pay a license fee to the heirs. Also if Warners does not start production by 2011, the Siegels can sue to recover their damages.
And we all thought Superman's only weakness was Kryptonite.