Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Disney's earliest Mickey Mouse enters public domain as US copyright expires

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 201 posts

Re: Disney's earliest Mickey Mouse enters public domain as US copyright expires

#61

Post by mFixman »

zinekeller wrote: post #45
cubefox wrote: post #41

This is a silly question, but when exactly did Mickey Mouse enter the public domain? On January 1, sure, but which time zone?

On whatever local time where you are (at least for US). The "at least in US" is important since that most people who didn't clarify that "Steamboat Willie" is in the public domain specifically in reference to US laws - in other countries it is either already PD, or in a handful countries like Mexico (which has author+100, technically no concept of corporate copyright except for the government) is still not PD.

Does that mean that I can publish a Mickey video in New York that's illegal to watch in California for the next couple of hours?

Neat.

Re: Disney's earliest Mickey Mouse enters public domain as US copyright expires

#62

Post by ajdude »

cool_dude85 wrote: post #33
manquer wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only the steamboat Willie version, the one without gloves . Also practically it doesn’t matter whether it could be fine, most businesses can’t afford to fight an extended legal battle with Disney

Someone, in one of these threads a few weeks ago, posted what was claimed to be a movie poster/ad from the same year with his red pants and gloves: https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/22084 If you could verify the timing on that I guess it would go into public domain as well.

Came here to mention this. That poster is a full color Mickcy with gloves from 1928, and I would love to hear from a copyright lawyer if this Mickcy is also in the public domain.

Re: Disney's earliest Mickey Mouse enters public domain as US copyright expires

#63

Post by ajdude »

There's apparently a poster of Mickcy wearing gloves in full color from the same year Steamboat Willie came out (1928).

Does this mean that full color gloved Mickcy is also in the public domain?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mickey-mouse-poster_n_2149610

Re: Disney's earliest Mickey Mouse enters public domain as US copyright expires

#64

Post by zozbot234 »

ajdude wrote: post #63

There's apparently a poster of Mickcy wearing gloves in full color from the same year Steamboat Willie came out (1928). Does this mean that full color gloved Mickcy is also in the public domain? https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mickey-mouse-poster_n_2149610

Is this really in the same year? Wiki shows a black/white poster with the mouse wearing light gloves, then later in the article a color version from 1978.

Re: Disney's earliest Mickey Mouse enters public domain as US copyright expires

#65

Post by traverseda »

weinzierl wrote: post #29

Before people cheer too much, surprisingly works can retroactively be snatched back from the public domain and go back into copyrighted state. The prime example is the movie Metropolis . It became public domain in 1953 but copyright was restored in 1996 only to re-enter the public domain a year ago today.

I'd be interested in hearing why that isn't tortious interference, or did the government pay out a bunch of money when it became copywritten again?

Re: Disney's earliest Mickey Mouse enters public domain as US copyright expires

#66

Post by ajdude »

zozbot234 wrote: post #64
ajdude wrote: post #63

There's apparently a poster of Mickcy wearing gloves in full color from the same year Steamboat Willie came out (1928). Does this mean that full color gloved Mickcy is also in the public domain? https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mickey-mouse-poster_n_2149610

Is this really in the same year? Wiki shows a black/white poster with the mouse wearing light gloves, then later in the article a color version from 1978.

Definitely seems to be from 1928: https://movieposters.ha.com/itm/movie-posters/animation/mick...

Re: Disney's earliest Mickey Mouse enters public domain as US copyright expires

#67

Post by nemo44x »

8organicbits wrote: post #26
blendo wrote: post #24

“US copyright law says the rights to characters can be held for 95 years.” 95 years ago was also about when the cinema and recording industries began. Since then, I’ll argue, all recorded entertainment and theatrical performances have become “fixed” into our culture similar to how Plato, the Bible, and Shakespeare became cultural touchstones due to literacy and the printing press. And now, as they enter the public do…

Is Mickey content good enough that we'll see continued interest? My encounters with Mickey (35 year old American) have been only through the movie Fantasia and I know he is a prominent mascot of Disney World. But the pull to Disney world is probably what, Star Wars or Pixar these days? I was recently thinking Star Wars and the Friends TV series could reach that permanent status. Mickey seems unlikely to me.

I’m assuming you don’t have kids? Little kids love Mickey Mouse and there’s lots of old and new content featuring him. Little kids still dream of going to Disney World to meet Mickey Mouse and the other characters.

Re: Disney's earliest Mickey Mouse enters public domain as US copyright expires

#68

Post by RyanHamilton »

nonrandomstring wrote: post #37
blendo wrote: post #24

“US copyright law says the rights to characters can be held for 95 years.” 95 years ago was also about when the cinema and recording industries began. Since then, I’ll argue, all recorded entertainment and theatrical performances have become “fixed” into our culture similar to how Plato, the Bible, and Shakespeare became cultural touchstones due to literacy and the printing press. And now, as they enter the public do…

> Plato, the Bible, and Shakespeare > inescapable part of our common heritage Indeed, but how? The three circles of Mickey Mouse is the semiotic emblem for everything that is shallow, plastic, maudlin and sentimental, self-obsessed, cynically capitalistic and exploitative. In British (army and construction worker culture) the phrase "Mickey Mouse" is used for anything that's an ineffectual toy or poorly manufactured.…

Many adults of a certain age will have very happy childhood memories of watching classic disney movies such as jungle book, cinderella, toy story, Lion King. Most creative companies would love to have the kind of love that disneys back catalog has. Alas this love does mean the easy ability to sell plastic toys for every film.

Re: Disney's earliest Mickey Mouse enters public domain as US copyright expires

#69

Post by RyanHamilton »

chungy wrote: post #54
globular-toast wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it odd? The original is analogue. What resolution should it be scanned at? What about the Mona Lisa ?

People often think that old video must be stuck to standard definition (or worse), because they're used to seeing it on NTSC/PAL broadcasts, VHS, or DVD. The reality is, these things were captured on film, and there's no reason you can't scan the film in high definition resolutions. Film is an analogue medium whose upper bound for resolution is dictated by the film stock and grain; 35mm film is sufficient to produce…

Thanks for mentioning Oz, that 4K is really good. Hopefully more films get that treatment.

Re: Disney's earliest Mickey Mouse enters public domain as US copyright expires

#70

Post by anonymfus »

NolF wrote: post #52
dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trademark law only stops someone else using the character to represent themselves as Disney, or where is might cause confusion around that. A simple prominent disclaimer can fix that. That's assuming Disney could ever register the trademark, which is not a given, no matter how often they use it.

The question would be, do you want to fight Disney lawyers to make the argument that your use was not as a trademark, represented as Disney, or that it might cause confusion? With or without a disclaimer.

There is no DMCA analogue for trademarks, so, for example, YouTube has no obligation to automate trademark complaints or to resolve disputes between trademark owners and video creators, so almost every case will go through the court, and overloading courts with bogus cases can have consequences for them.
Post reply on HN