Detective Comics, Inc. v. Bruns Publications, Inc., 111 F.2d 432 (2d Cir. 1940),[1] the case of Superman v. Wonderman,[2] is a 1940 decision of the Second Circuit in which the court held that the archetype of a comic book hero, in this case a cape-wearing benevolent-Hercules figure (Superman), is an idea, which the copyright in the comic strips does not protect against copying; only the specific details of the strips, their particular expression, enjoy legal protection. The author of the court's opinion was Judge Augustus N. Hand and the panel of Second Circuit judges included Judge Learned Hand.
Background
The defendant Bruns Publications, Inc. published a comic strip magazine that featured an action hero called "Wonder Man". The plaintiff Detective Comics, Inc. published a comic strip magazine called "Action Comics" that featured Superman. Bruns published strips resembling Superman strips. The court described the strips in these terms:
"Each publication portrays a man of miraculous strength and speed called 'Superman' in 'Action Comics' and 'Wonderman' in the magazine of Bruns. The attributes and antics of 'Superman' and 'Wonderman' are closely similar. Each at times conceals his strength beneath ordinary clothing but after removing his cloak stands revealed in full panoply in a skintight acrobatic costume. The only real difference between them is that 'Superman' wears a blue uniform and 'Wonderman' a red one. Each is termed the champion of the oppressed. Each is shown running toward a full moon 'off into the night', and each is shown crushing a gun in his powerful hands. 'Superman' is pictured as stopping a bullet with his person and 'Wonderman' as arresting and throwing back shells. Each is depicted as shot at by three men, yet as wholly impervious to the missiles that strike him. 'Superman' is shown as leaping over a twenty story building, and 'Wonderman' as leaping from building to building.