What Could Have Entered the Public Domain on January 1, 2014 • Hacker News Board

Re: What Could Have Entered the Public Domain on January 1, 2014

#31

Post by salient » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 5:02 PM UTC

benihana wrote: post #24

kevando wrote: post #3

For those curious, this is mostly a result of Disney. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/10/25...

I can't really fault Disney for this. Mickey Mouse is one of the most recognizable symbols/brands on earth. The difference between Disney and McDonalds and Coca Cola is that there isn't an expectation we all get unfettered access to use the Golden Arches or the Coke logo. Disney is still making new IP with Mickey Mouse; why should they be expected to give up their rights to their most recognizable character that they…

I'm still not convinced any one entity deserves to keep a creation for so long under monopoly given by the society (some interesting discussions in 1869 [1] about this), but let's assume they do. I'd still like to see a system where you only get copyright for new works for 5 years. Then you have to pay $1,000 to renew it for another 5 years. And then the fee increases geometrically (and also adjusted to inflation), to something like $1 million+ after 50+ years, because if the work is worth that much to you after so much time, then you should be able to pay for it, and it would also "give back" to the society that keeps granting you the monopoly for that work.

Then the average lifetime of copyright monopolies should be around 15 years, which is actually about what it was when copyright laws were first created (the average would be dragged down a lot by people who wouldn't care about stuff they made in a week enough to pay $1,000 5 years later, but most of the "real works" that would be worth it, will probably have it for around 30 years or so.

We see it with books that after 10 years most of them are basically dead, and nobody cares about them anymore (can't find that link right now, but some of you probably know what I'm referring to). There are some "Mickeys" here and there that are relevant 100 years later under copyright, but it's more like 1 in a million works. The rest is abandoned - but it still retains the copyright on it so nobody can re-use it to improve the culture of the society (even if it just means having a company like Google find all the old books and digitize them, something they've barely won, and is actually getting appealed right now). I think that's just wrong.

[1] - http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130503/17414322946/discus...

Re: What Could Have Entered the Public Domain on January 1, 2014

#32

Post by stinkytaco » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 5:03 PM UTC

benihana wrote: post #24

kevando wrote: post #3

For those curious, this is mostly a result of Disney. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/10/25...

I can't really fault Disney for this. Mickey Mouse is one of the most recognizable symbols/brands on earth. The difference between Disney and McDonalds and Coca Cola is that there isn't an expectation we all get unfettered access to use the Golden Arches or the Coke logo. Disney is still making new IP with Mickey Mouse; why should they be expected to give up their rights to their most recognizable character that they…

They would not be relinquishing their trademarks or the rights to make more Mickey Mouse movies. Nor would this necessarily mean that the character of Mickey Mouse would go into the public domain. Simply that the discrete works would now be public domain.

There are Donald Duck works in the public domain (Spirit of '43) and that doesn't seem to impact their bottom line terribly.

Re: What Could Have Entered the Public Domain on January 1, 2014

#33

Post by dmm » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 5:06 PM UTC

benihana wrote: post #24

kevando wrote: post #3

For those curious, this is mostly a result of Disney. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/10/25...

I can't really fault Disney for this. Mickey Mouse is one of the most recognizable symbols/brands on earth. The difference between Disney and McDonalds and Coca Cola is that there isn't an expectation we all get unfettered access to use the Golden Arches or the Coke logo. Disney is still making new IP with Mickey Mouse; why should they be expected to give up their rights to their most recognizable character that they…

Disney was never threatened with losing their trademarks only the copyrights on very old cartoons.

Re: What Could Have Entered the Public Domain on January 1, 2014

#34

Post by ewillbefull » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 5:08 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #30

I do not see a problem with indefinite copyright protections. One of the assumptions is that everything being equal the same works would exist if it were not for copyright protections. However, I would argue without the extended copyright protections, most of these [future] classic works would not exist, simply because publishers/studios would not invest in the creation/distribution of the works initially. In other w…

Nothing you wrote tries to justify indefinite copyright protections.

Re: What Could Have Entered the Public Domain on January 1, 2014

#35

Post by jessriedel » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 5:09 PM UTC

benihana wrote: post #24

kevando wrote: post #3

For those curious, this is mostly a result of Disney. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/10/25...

I can't really fault Disney for this. Mickey Mouse is one of the most recognizable symbols/brands on earth. The difference between Disney and McDonalds and Coca Cola is that there isn't an expectation we all get unfettered access to use the Golden Arches or the Coke logo. Disney is still making new IP with Mickey Mouse; why should they be expected to give up their rights to their most recognizable character that they…

I think you're confused. Disney is free to make new Mickey Mouse movies, and those will be protected by copyright. Likewise, they can register Mickey Mouse as a trademark for certain business situations so no one is ever tricked into thinking a 3rd party product is endorsed by Disney. Buy what they absolutely shouldn't have is the ability to prevent other people from writing new Mickey stories, from watching 70 year old Mickey cartoons on YouTube, or from selling black plastic hats with Mickey Mouse ears. How could you dispute this? If you do, why shouldn't Shakespeare's estate keep exclusive rights to all his works?

Re: What Could Have Entered the Public Domain on January 1, 2014

#36

Post by Avenger42 » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 5:10 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #30

I do not see a problem with indefinite copyright protections. One of the assumptions is that everything being equal the same works would exist if it were not for copyright protections. However, I would argue without the extended copyright protections, most of these [future] classic works would not exist, simply because publishers/studios would not invest in the creation/distribution of the works initially. In other w…

No one (rational) is arguing for no legal protections. However, there's a difference between "the creator gets a period of time in which they're not competing with themselves" and "nothing created post-1978 (or affected by the 1978 copyright extensions) will ever realistically enter the public domain because of continuing copyright extensions". What makes these works so much more valuable that their creators should never have to give up the rights to the public, the way that creators in the USA for nearly 200 years did?

Re: What Could Have Entered the Public Domain on January 1, 2014

#37

Post by Touche » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 5:12 PM UTC

stinkytaco wrote: post #32

benihana wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't really fault Disney for this. Mickey Mouse is one of the most recognizable symbols/brands on earth. The difference between Disney and McDonalds and Coca Cola is that there isn't an expectation we all get unfettered access to use the Golden Arches or the Coke logo. Disney is still making new IP with Mickey Mouse; why should they be expected to give up their rights to their most recognizable character that they…

They would not be relinquishing their trademarks or the rights to make more Mickey Mouse movies. Nor would this necessarily mean that the character of Mickey Mouse would go into the public domain. Simply that the discrete works would now be public domain. There are Donald Duck works in the public domain (Spirit of '43) and that doesn't seem to impact their bottom line terribly.

These days kids barely know who Donald Duck or Mickey are. I wonder how much of that is because Disney intentionally invests in other IP that isn't under this threat.

Re: What Could Have Entered the Public Domain on January 1, 2014

#38

Post by Avenger42 » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 5:16 PM UTC

Touche wrote: post #37

stinkytaco wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They would not be relinquishing their trademarks or the rights to make more Mickey Mouse movies. Nor would this necessarily mean that the character of Mickey Mouse would go into the public domain. Simply that the discrete works would now be public domain. There are Donald Duck works in the public domain (Spirit of '43) and that doesn't seem to impact their bottom line terribly.

These days kids barely know who Donald Duck or Mickey are. I wonder how much of that is because Disney intentionally invests in other IP that isn't under this threat.

There's a newly-created Mickey Mouse series on Disney Channel; from what little I've seen of it, Mickey's look is much more of a throwback to the Steamboat Willie age.

Also, when I saw Frozen at the theater a couple of weeks ago, there was an old-style Mickey cartoon before the picture (albeit one that broke the fourth wall in ways I don't believe the old cartoons did).

Re: What Could Have Entered the Public Domain on January 1, 2014

#39

Post by will_brown » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 5:16 PM UTC

stanmancan wrote: post #21

I know nothing on the subject, but would it be possibly for Disney (or any other creator for that matter) to start a Mickey Mouse company, with Mickey as the logo and mascot, that sells Mickey Mouse paraphernalia and protect the characters as a trademark?

Just to clarify this point. Disney does not need to start a separate company to Trademark Mickey Mouse. In fact you better believe Disney is the registered owner multiple dozens, because the way Trademark works there are dozens of Trademark categories which need to be registered separately, of Mickey Mouse Trademarks.

See: http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&state=4802... (and search "Mickey Mouse", USPTO does not permit linking to result pages)

Moreover, "Mickey Mouse" can be Trademarked in name and then the actual "logo" (drawing of a mouse) can be Trademarked.

Re: What Could Have Entered the Public Domain on January 1, 2014

#40

Post by horseapples » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 5:16 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #30

I do not see a problem with indefinite copyright protections. One of the assumptions is that everything being equal the same works would exist if it were not for copyright protections. However, I would argue without the extended copyright protections, most of these [future] classic works would not exist, simply because publishers/studios would not invest in the creation/distribution of the works initially. In other w…

I can create and distribute any creation for free thanks to the internet. Your argument assumes that a publisher/studio is required, when this is simply not the case, and not the direction the world is headed. Copyright and all IP law stifles creation at the cost of creativity.

I create because I'm a creator, not because there is a fiscal reward. I create because I want to make a great product, not because I want to make a lot of money. I don't create so I can make some corporate fat ass rich.