In 1932, two teenagers came up with an idea that turned out to be one of the most successful franchises known to mankind. Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster were actually in college when they created Superman. At the time, DC Comic’s flagship was merely a concept with no discernible structure. The inventors failed to file for a patent and they have been paying the price ever since.
Many people have had what they consider to be a brilliant idea at one point in their lives. Few of them have had the presence of mind to cash it in. There are a number of those who have come up with a concept and applied for patents only to see their hopes and aspirations crash before their very eyes.
Take Mpesa, for instance; the service had KES 185.4 billion in deposits in March 2012. Though its creator still remains a mystery, a patent during the time of its inception would not have been possible. Kenyan law does not allow the issuing of patents for business models. However, if you sell your idea to a company like Safaricom, you can always negotiate for royalties. You can get a patent from the Kenya Industrial Property Institute (KIPI). In such cases, companies often pay a fraction of their profits to the product’s creator.
As successful as it is, Mpesa pales in comparison to one of the world’s most iconic characters. In the film industry alone, Superman has made USD 889.4 million (KES 74.7 billion) in box office revenue. This doesn’t include comics, adaptations and merchandise, which is estimated to be somewhere in the hundreds of millions.
130 Dollars for Superman
Dubbed, The Reign of the Superman, Siegel and Shuster’s original concept was scrapped, forcing the duo to re-write their main character. DC Comics paid them USD 130 for the rights to Superman in 1938. Adjusted for inflation, this would ammount to USD 2131 (KES 179,000) today. However, upon realizing the potential that their character held, Siegel and Shuster tried to sue DC Comics for USD 5 million in 1975. If you adjust this for inflation, it would be equivalent to USD 21.3 million (KES 1.8 billion) today.
The court ruled in favour of DC but the creators managed to secure a copyright for Superboy. DC later paid them USD 94,000 (KES 33.6 million in 2012) for it. The company eventually bowed to pressure in December 1975. By the end of the year, the duo was earning USD 20,000 (worth KES 7.14 million in 2012) a year in Superman royalties.
Shuster and Siegel died in 1992 and 1996 respectively, leaving Joanne Siegel, the latter’s wife to tough it out in court along with her daughter, Laura Siegel Larson.
On the other hand, Warner Bros bought the movie rights to Superman for an upfront fee of USD 1.5 million in 1975 (worth KES 160.4 million in 2012). This was accompanied by an annual fee of USD 500,000 (worth KES 536 million today) for 11-years, beginning in 2002. On top of this, Warner Bros paid DC USD 45,000 (worth KES 4.8 million today) per episode for the TV series Smallville, which was loosely based on Superman’s origin.
In 2006, DC received USD 21.1 million (worth KES 2.02 billion today) for Superman Returns, a film that earned Warner Bros a worldwide gross of USD 400 million (worth KES 38.2 billion today). In 2008, Joanna Siegel and her daughter, Laura, managed to recapture half the Superman copyright. Joanna passed away in February of 2011 and the ruling is still pending, due to an appeal from DC comics. The company has since made an unspecified offer to Laura for tens of millions of dollars.
Had Siegel and Shuster patented their idea, they would be multimillionaires by now. Their legacy would have been more than just a reference on the merchandise. Siegel’s daughter would never have had to take up her late father’s 70-year battle.
Apple Versus Samsung
By now, almost everyone with a smart phone knows about the recently concluded copyright battle between apple and Samsung. Apple, an American multinational consumer electronics firm, recently sued Samsung, its multinational Korean competitor for unlawfully copying its innovative designs and ideas. According to Apple, the Korean firm blatantly adopted several features without the American firms prior consent.
After the jury’s verdict, Samsung was forced to pay Apple about USD 1.05 billion (KES 88.2 billion) in damages. By this time, Samsung had already counter-sued Apple based on similar charges. According to The Verge, an electronics resource database, the Korean giant accused Apple of copying designs from some of its devises. As a result, the iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4 and second-generation iPads will be banned in South Korea. Samsung will also be forced to stop selling 12 of its devices including the Galaxy Tab and the Galaxy S II within the region.
Perhaps the most contested feature, which Apple claimed was stolen, is the Slide to Unlock digital latch. Funny enough, the original “slide to unlock” latch could have been invented thousands of years ago by some unknown locksmith or some other “engineer” with a stick and a hole in the wall. The New York Historical Society has a sliding latch that dates back to the late 1800’s, yet no particular inventor has been credited with its invention.
If some long lost descendant were to come forward, they could build a case against Apple for the theft of intellectual property. Of course, the charges would be frivolous, owing to the fact that no patent was issued at the time, but it would manage to put one of America’s biggest companies in its place.
So the next time you come up with some crazy idea, patent it before you sell it to someone else. You never know, it just might turn out to be one of the biggest franchises of your generation.