James Gunn’s highly anticipated film Superman (previously titled Superman: Legacy), set to kick off the rebooted DC Universe (DCU) on July 11, 2025, has hit a significant roadblock as the estate of Superman co-creator Joseph Shuster has launched a lawsuit against Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) and DC Comics. As of today, March 13, 2025, the legal battle, filed in late January in New York’s Southern District federal court, threatens to disrupt the movie’s international release in key markets like the United Kingdom, Canada, Ireland, and Australia. The dispute hinges on complex international copyright laws, with the Shuster estate claiming ownership of Superman’s foreign rights and accusing WBD of years of unauthorized exploitation. This clash not only jeopardizes Gunn’s vision but also reignites a decades-long saga over the Man of Steel’s legacy.

The lawsuit, spearheaded by Shuster estate executor Mark Warren Peary and attorney Marc Toberoff, centers on a provision in British-tradition copyright law known as the “reversionary rights” clause. This rule stipulates that intellectual property rights revert to a creator’s estate 25 years after their death. Shuster, who co-created Superman with Jerome Siegel in 1938, passed away in 1992, meaning his foreign copyrights returned to his heirs in 2017 for most affected countries and 2021 for Canada. The estate alleges that since then, WBD has profited from Superman—through films like Justice League and Black Adam, TV shows, and merchandise—in these territories without their consent, violating local laws requiring approval from all copyright holders. Now, with Gunn’s Superman on the horizon, they’re demanding damages and an injunction to block its release in these regions unless a deal is struck.

Gunn, co-head of DC Studios alongside Peter Safran, has poured his creative energy into this project, casting David Corenswet as Clark Kent and crafting a narrative that blends Kryptonian heritage with human struggles. The film’s first trailer, released in December 2024, broke records as the most-viewed in DC history, signaling massive fan anticipation. Yet, this legal hurdle could derail that momentum. The Shuster estate isn’t just seeking a payout—they want a court order to halt Superman’s distribution in the disputed territories, a move that could cost WBD millions in box office revenue and fracture the DCU’s global rollout. “This isn’t about denying fans their Superman,” Toberoff said in a statement on March 12, 2025. “It’s about fair compensation for Joe Shuster’s foundational role.” WBD, however, stands firm, with a spokesperson declaring, “We fundamentally disagree with the lawsuit’s merits and will vigorously defend our rights.”

The timing couldn’t be worse for Gunn and DC Studios. Superman is the linchpin of their rebooted universe, a make-or-break moment after years of cinematic stumbles like The Flash and Shazam! Fury of the Gods. Losing access to markets like the UK and Canada—where superhero films consistently rake in substantial earnings—would be a blow to both finances and prestige. Fans on X are already buzzing, with reactions ranging from support for Shuster’s heirs—“Joe got screwed in ‘38; it’s time they paid up”—to frustration over potential delays—“Gunn’s Superman can’t catch a break, can it?” Some even speculate this could force WBD to rush a settlement, potentially reshaping how studios handle international IP rights moving forward.

This isn’t Superman’s first legal rodeo. Shuster and Siegel sold the character to DC’s predecessor for a paltry $130 in 1938, a deal that sparked decades of litigation as they and their heirs fought for a bigger slice of the billion-dollar pie. A 2013 ruling favored WBD in the U.S., but the Shuster estate now leverages foreign laws to press their case, arguing a 1992 agreement with Shuster’s sister didn’t cover overseas rights. WBD counters that their ownership is ironclad, filing a motion to dismiss on March 5, 2025, claiming the complaint lacks jurisdiction in a U.S. court. If the injunction holds, Superman could face a staggered release—hitting U.S. theaters while being stalled elsewhere—or a costly renegotiation with the estate.

For Gunn, who’s remained silent on the matter, the stakes are personal and professional. He’s spoken passionately about honoring Superman’s creators, even filming in Cleveland—Siegel and Shuster’s hometown—as a tribute. Yet, this lawsuit underscores the messy legacy he’s inherited. If unresolved by July, the film’s global launch could be marred, forcing WBD to either delay promotion or pivot to unaffected markets like the U.S. and continental Europe. Analysts predict a settlement is likely, given the tight timeline and the film’s importance, but any payout could set a precedent for other estates to challenge studio IP control.

As the clock ticks toward summer, the Superman saga is as gripping off-screen as on. Will Gunn’s Man of Steel soar above this legal kryptonite, or will the Shuster estate ground him in key territories? The outcome could ripple beyond DC, influencing how Hollywood navigates international copyright in an era of global franchises. For now, fans wait anxiously, torn between rooting for Shuster’s legacy and craving their next dose of Superman’s heroism. Whatever happens, this battle proves the Last Son of Krypton remains as contentious as he is iconic.