The Law of Superheroes

Based on lawandthemultiverse.com, this breezy book has the benefit of plenty of illustrations, but its presentation of the law is generally devoid of nuance. While it’s not wrong for the sake of drama the way a Law & Order episode or a comic book might be, it’s probably a much better read if you don’t actually know any law. It starts with the preposterous statement that “[t]he terms ‘superhero’ and ‘supervillain’ are trademarks co-owned by Marvel Characters, Inc. and DC Comics, Inc. These terms are used throughout this book solely to refer descriptively to Marvel and DC characters.” I don’t presume to know whether Marvel & DC asked for this ridiculous disclaimer in return for agreeing not to contest the extensive and helpful (and fair use!) images in the book, but, just to be clear: (1) superhero and supervillain are generic terms, not trademarks; (2) even if they weren’t, the owner (since a trademark must have an owner, not two who don’t control each other’s behavior) would not have any claim against a book that used a term “wrongly.”

But at least this is a good indication of what you’re going to get: some entertaining/shallow discussion of various legal dilemmas in which comics characters might find themselves. I did like the discussion of masked superheroes testifying in court, and the point that DC has solved this problem with a constitutional amendment allowing “registered meta-humans” to testify masked, which then means that DC has already put in place the very provision that in the Marvelverse sparked Civil War: “while the DC workaround would be effective in the courts, it does not seem as if that universe has fully dealt with the implications of that solution.” Heh.

Unfortunately, while sensitive to the First Amendment implications of anti-mask laws, the authors badly mishandle the idea of newsworthiness when it comes to invasion of privacy, claiming that Peter Parker would have a cause of action against someone who revealed that he was Spiderman because Peter Parker “is just a working stiff, a news photographer and, perhaps most importantly, is often written as a minor. The public probably doesn’t have as much of an interest in knowing these details.” Um, no. Dude is Spiderman. That his secret identity seems like an ordinary Joe is no more relevant to whether the Spiderman-Peter Parker link is newsworthy than the ordinariness of the contents of Anthony Weiner’s boxer-briefs is relevant to the newsworthiness of the fact that a Congressman was sending pictures of his erection around. So, as the authors suggest, don’t take the book as offering legal advice. ( )

As a regular reader of the blog this is based on, I enjoyed this book, although I had already read quite a bit of it on the internet.

This is a great way to explain real law in a fun and entertaining manner.

I thought the book was strongest when talking in generalities, such as the law as it would cover basic vigilante activity or super heroes who can fly, and when it was dealing with golden or silver age stories that are familiar to most everyone.

I thought that when they talked about more specific issues raised by recent comics that the book was less successful, This may just be because I haven't been following mainstream comics recently, but that's the point, A book like this should be accessible to general readers, and not just comic book geeks.

Still, there is a lot of information presented in a fun format and it should be required reading for comic book authors to keep them from going astray when dealing with issues of the law.

These are real attorneys citing real cases and talking about real law things. So even though we are talking about Spider-Man and Superman and a bunch of other imaginary people you learn a lot about the law. I’m not saying that you can pass the bar exam after reading this but you will definitely know stuff you didn’t know before you read it. (Unless you are an attorney yourself.) There are words like pursuant and other legal words but the book is not hard to understand. Many times the law will be quoted which could be hard to understand but then you are given an example of what it would look like in the real world (well, kind of) to help it make sense. There were only a couple of times when a term was used and then not explained so it takes you a minute but eventually you can work it out for yourself. It’s fun for anyone who likes comics and you get a good overview of law from copyright to immigration from criminal procedure to rights of privacy and everything in between. I found it all very interesting and would not have picked up a law book if it weren’t for the unique approach. ( )

http://lampbane.livejournal.com/649717.html

"Remember when "The Science of..." books were all the rage? Well, this is kind of like that, but of course, for the law. The notable difference is that the law can be a little more mutable than science. However, there are still points they're not going to get around so matter how much creative thinking they engage in, but they'll at least explain why. They cite real laws and real cases in this (using the Bluebook format), as well as pointing out significant differences in real law and the laws as they exist in the comics (for example, the DC Universe has a different 12th Amendment). The breath of material they draw from is pretty broad but not really expansive—with one exception they've restricted themselves to DC and Marvel comics, partly due to the fact that those two companies hold the trademark on the word "superhero"—which is a shame, since there's probably a good wealth of interesting examples to be drawn from other works like Invincible.

In the introduction the authors point out how studying real law can be quite boring, but if you spice up the examples it gets way more interesting. And the thing is, they're right. While I wouldn't necessarily recommend this for serious study, I think for the layman it does a good job of explaining many basic points of law, and there were a lot of things I learned or understand better as a result of this book. Their style is very casual but clear, giving you just enough background in particular points before bringing up their particular superhero example and explaining how it would or wouldn't work.

Overall I found it a fun read; my biggest gripe would probably be that certain sections could be longer (the later chapters seem to sort of skim over their respective topics). But if you like superheroes (especially if you like them "realistic") you'll probably enjoy this." ( )

Upon receipt, I was ready to dismiss this book as trivial. The cover highlights such "important" questions as "Could Superman sue if someone exposed his true identity..." and "Would the second amendment apply to Wolverine's claws?".
But one shouldn't judge a book by its cover. In fact, the book provides a clear, if elemental discussion of how the legal system, and the government that supports that system, is designed to work. As another reviewer puts it, it's a primer on law.
The nerd content can be a bit much, unfortunately. A reference to the Constitution might be followed by a reference to the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants. The authors are using Superhero Comic Books as the base for their discussion after all.

All in all, though, the book is both informative and fun.