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

Mickey’s Copyright Adventure: Early Disney Toon Is Set to Be Public Property

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 59 posts

Re: Mickey’s Copyright Adventure: Early Disney Toon Is Set to Be Public Property

#11

Post by vlovich123 »

retrac wrote: post #4

Copyright in Canada for films is 75 years. So, Disney works before 1948 are public domain here. I can't seem to actually find any of them, though. I am not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure I'd be within my legal rights to take e.g. an original print of Bambi as released in 1942, scan it, and make it available online for Canadians. I'm also pretty sure I'd get sued anyway. Getting a copy of the original is also something…

AFAIK you don’t need an original print. All versions that aren’t materially different lack copyright and are free to distribute.

Re: Mickey’s Copyright Adventure: Early Disney Toon Is Set to Be Public Property

#12

Post by endisneigh »

alexb_ wrote: post #7
gcanyon wrote: post #6

It's pedantic to say it, but copyright is not directly intended to help creators; its purpose is to enrich the public by inspiring creators to produce more. Helping creators profit/benefit from their work is a means to an end. Creative work benefits the public in at least two ways: primarily, by being itself. People like reading the original Harry Potter books. Copyright encourages that by allowing creators to sell t…

I've heard the suggestion that copyright could be extended after 5 years by paying a dollar to renew, after 6 years by paying 2 dollars, 7 years by paying 4, 8 with 8, etc. If your copyright is so immensly valuable that it's worth paying to renew it, that's fine. The longer you keep something in copyright, the larger your harm to society becomes due to preventing legal fan works and derivatives from being made. The f…

seems like a good idea - what's the downside?

Re: Mickey’s Copyright Adventure: Early Disney Toon Is Set to Be Public Property

#13

Post by somat »

Note that "Mickey: the character" does not suddenly become public domain, Mickey is a trademark of the Disney corporation, and trademarks do not expire. However some specific "Mickey: the film" will go into public domain.

I am not a lawyer, but I suspect this means that is will be fine to redistribute specific early mickey films, however any remixes, or reuse of the content, you may find yourself violating Disney's mouse trademark. You would have to successfully argue that your use of Mickey came form a public domain source and does not exist in the same market as Disney's trademark... Good luck on that, you'll need it.

Re: Mickey’s Copyright Adventure: Early Disney Toon Is Set to Be Public Property

#14

Post by Sunspark »

vlovich123 wrote: post #11
retrac wrote: post #4

Copyright in Canada for films is 75 years. So, Disney works before 1948 are public domain here. I can't seem to actually find any of them, though. I am not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure I'd be within my legal rights to take e.g. an original print of Bambi as released in 1942, scan it, and make it available online for Canadians. I'm also pretty sure I'd get sued anyway. Getting a copy of the original is also something…

AFAIK you don’t need an original print. All versions that aren’t materially different lack copyright and are free to distribute.

I would say caution is advised. I have seen it argued that one trick to prevent expiry is to re-record the audio with a new orchestra thus causing it to become a new production.

Re: Mickey’s Copyright Adventure: Early Disney Toon Is Set to Be Public Property

#15

Post by ghaff »

endisneigh wrote: post #12
alexb_ wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard the suggestion that copyright could be extended after 5 years by paying a dollar to renew, after 6 years by paying 2 dollars, 7 years by paying 4, 8 with 8, etc. If your copyright is so immensly valuable that it's worth paying to renew it, that's fine. The longer you keep something in copyright, the larger your harm to society becomes due to preventing legal fan works and derivatives from being made. The f…

seems like a good idea - what's the downside?

One downside of any sort of copyright registration requirement (probably especially one requiring ongoing renewals) is that it benefits corporations at the expense of individual creatives. Disney's lawyers are not going to forget to renew and the revenues involved mean that any registration is likely trivial. Not so for an individual author or photographer.

In fact, groups representing authors and photographers have opposed orphan works legislation in the past.

The US used to require affirmative action to gain copyright protection but this was phased out to be consistent with most other countries.

Re: Mickey’s Copyright Adventure: Early Disney Toon Is Set to Be Public Property

#16

Post by coredog64 »

endisneigh wrote: post #12
alexb_ wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard the suggestion that copyright could be extended after 5 years by paying a dollar to renew, after 6 years by paying 2 dollars, 7 years by paying 4, 8 with 8, etc. If your copyright is so immensly valuable that it's worth paying to renew it, that's fine. The longer you keep something in copyright, the larger your harm to society becomes due to preventing legal fan works and derivatives from being made. The f…

seems like a good idea - what's the downside?

Not OP, but I would imagine that the USG isn’t in a position to efficiently and effectively accept lots of small payments. Working from that premise, you’d probably optimize for taking advance payment for 8 years with some way to retroactively pay if your work is suddenly worth more than $20.

Re: Mickey’s Copyright Adventure: Early Disney Toon Is Set to Be Public Property

#17

Post by kingbirdy »

Sunspark wrote: post #14
vlovich123 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK you don’t need an original print. All versions that aren’t materially different lack copyright and are free to distribute.

I would say caution is advised. I have seen it argued that one trick to prevent expiry is to re-record the audio with a new orchestra thus causing it to become a new production.

A new score would certainly qualify as "materially different", to GPs point

Re: Mickey’s Copyright Adventure: Early Disney Toon Is Set to Be Public Property

#18

Post by Sunspark »

kingbirdy wrote: post #17
Sunspark wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say caution is advised. I have seen it argued that one trick to prevent expiry is to re-record the audio with a new orchestra thus causing it to become a new production.

A new score would certainly qualify as "materially different", to GPs point

Yes and no. You can still record the original music again, but with a brand new orchestra. Is it materially different then? From a legal standpoint? From an individual standpoint?

Re: Mickey’s Copyright Adventure: Early Disney Toon Is Set to Be Public Property

#19

Post by redwall_hp »

II2II wrote: post #8
gcanyon wrote: post #6

It's pedantic to say it, but copyright is not directly intended to help creators; its purpose is to enrich the public by inspiring creators to produce more. Helping creators profit/benefit from their work is a means to an end. Creative work benefits the public in at least two ways: primarily, by being itself. People like reading the original Harry Potter books. Copyright encourages that by allowing creators to sell t…

The issue, as it is presented in the article, is with how copyright law intermingles with trademark law. They noted that people will be able to distribute the original short. They also noted that any unique works that incorporate the iconic mouse (even in its original form) may run into litigation. Given Disney's financial interest in The Mouse, I suspect they were understating it. It is easy to oversimplify what is…

Trademarks should be limited to providing identification for a business, not something that applies to products or cultural elements.

You shouldn't be able to hold a trademark on "Star Wars" or "iPhone," but should be able to for LucasFilm or Apple. All product names should be effectively generic.

Copyright and patents should just be straight up abolished, or at least severely scaled back and limited to 1-3 years.

Re: Mickey’s Copyright Adventure: Early Disney Toon Is Set to Be Public Property

#20

Post by nextlevelwizard »

gcanyon wrote: post #6

It's pedantic to say it, but copyright is not directly intended to help creators; its purpose is to enrich the public by inspiring creators to produce more. Helping creators profit/benefit from their work is a means to an end. Creative work benefits the public in at least two ways: primarily, by being itself. People like reading the original Harry Potter books. Copyright encourages that by allowing creators to sell t…

I wouldn’t want just anyone to be able to use my characters and setting for their grummy cashgrabs.

I think reasonable copyright would be 10 years or lifetime of the author which ever occurs later. This way the author would be in charge of their characters while alive and their kids would still gain from works done in the later years

Post reply on HN