Warner Bros. sued over liberal use of 'Superman' footage. (Media & Technology).

A dispute over rights to the DVD versions of several "Superman" features has led to a legal tussle between the movies' British licensor and its U.S. distributor, Warner Bros.

Pueblo Film Licensing Ltd. holds the rights to "Superman -- The Movie" and two of its sequels. It filed suit in federal court in Los Angeles on June 24, accusing Warner Bros., Warner Home Video and other AOL-Time Warner Inc. units of illegally releasing the movies on DVD.

Pueblo claims that Warner Bros. did not have the copyrights to documentary footage and film cuts from the first "Superman" movie. Warner also did not have the right to release "Superman III" on DVD, according to the suit.

"Warner Bros. could have released the original 'Superman' movie on DVD, and we would have nothing to complain about," said Jeffrey Spitz, litigation partner at Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman Machtinger & Kinsella LLP, who represents Pueblo along with partner Bert Fields. "But that's not what they did. They changed the movie without our permission, using our materials, and then released it."

Warner Home Video spokeswoman Ronnee Sass declined to comment about the litigation.

In May 2001, Warner Bros. released DVD versions of the "Superman" movies, separately and in a set. One of the DVD versions, "Superman: The Movie Expanded Edition," included eight re-edited scenes with special sound effects, deleted scenes, screen tests and documentary footage from a 1979 film called "The Making of Superman 1 -- The Movie," which was produced by the late Alexander Salkind, according to the suit. The expanded "Superman" movie was also released in theaters at about the same time.

Additionally, the suit alleges, Warner Bros. illegally released "Superman III" on DVD as part of the set. Pueblo does not own the rights to "Superman IV."

Pueblo claims it should have received up to a 50 percent share of the net profits on the re-released movies. If Warner Bros. turns out to have broken copyright laws, however, Pueblo could claim 100 percent of the net profits, Spitz said.

Last year, Pueblo flied a separate breach of contract case against Warner Bros. in Los Angeles Superior Court over the "Superman" DVDs. That case is set for trial on July 17.

Warner Bros. also was sued in December 2001 by the screenwriter and director of "The Exorcist," who claim copyright infringement over "The Exorcist -- The Version You've Never Seen," which was released in theaters and DVD in 2000.

Copyright infringement cases likely will increase as more pre-released movies come out in DVD, said Robert Helfing, head of the intellectual property group in the L.A. office of Sedgwick Detert Moran & Arnold.

While DVDs often contain extra footage to entice buyers, copyright contracts for prereleased movies rarely include any mention of copyrights over additional footage, documentaries and other parts of the film. Movie distributors, Helfing noted, must prove they have the copyright to the added footage and scenes.

"There is a strong policy in favor of the copyright owner," he said. "It's going to be a difficult burden for Warner Bros. to assert rights in footage they don't necessarily have rights to. Typically, a distributor's rights don't go further than the theatrical version."