Who owns Superman?

Variety drops this interesting tidbit in a story about the legal ruling this week that granted partial rights to Action Comics #1, the first appearance of Superman, to the heirs of Jerry Siegel, who co-created the Man of Steel with artist Joe Shuster (Variety spells his name wrong) back in the 1930s:

The Schuster(sic) estate originally did not participate with the Siegels' case because Schuster has no spouse or children. But his estate later won a ruling of a recapture identical to the Siegels, which will be effective in 2013. At that point, the Siegels and Schusters will own the entire copyright to Action Comics No. 1. That will give them the chance to set up Superman pics, TV shows and other projects at another studio.

If they want to get a new "Superman" or even "Justice League" pic featuring the superhero, Warner Bros. and DC will be forced to go into production by 2011.

DC spins the latest decision this way:

DC owns other elements like Superman's ability to fly, the term kryptonite, the Lex Luthor and Jimmy Olsen characters, Superman's powers and expanded origins.

In a statement, Warner Bros. and DC said, "Warner and DC Comics are pleased that the court has affirmed that the vast majority of key elements associated with the Superman character that were developed after Action Comics No. 1 are not part of the copyrights that the plaintiffs have recaptured and therefore remain solely owned by DC Comics."

But, of course, it can (and probably will) be argued that some of those elements also were created by Siegel and/or Shuster as well. Somebody who's more up on their Superman lore can help me out, please.

But even if you look at just Action #1, it depicts Superman's origins as a baby rocketed to earth (although Krypton isn't referenced by name) and his super strength. It also shows him leaping into the air and staying up there for a long time, over great distances. Is this flying or not? That's subject to debate.

Also introduced in Action #1: A little lady named Lois Lane. If you're going to tell a decent Superman story--in any medium--you need to include his famed female foil.

And, oh yeah, Action #1 introduces CLARK KENT. Would this mean DC couldn't use Superman's alter ego, either?

Perhaps most significantly, the comic depicts Superman in his iconic costume. Does this mean, come 2011, Superman is going to wear something else? And, if so, is he still Superman?

(also, it looks like Siegel and Shuster created the Superman logo, too)