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

#101

Post by judk » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 7:24 PM UTC

Touche wrote: post #50

Avenger42 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

Maybe I'm being nostalgic but Mickey used to be a big movie star and now he's relegated to mostly direct-to-dvd. He was still immensely popular through the 1980s with rereleases of Fantasia in theaters, Mickey's Christmas Carol, etc. Now it seems unimaginable that he'd star in a big budget Disney film. It seems reasonable to me that they are preferring IP that was created post-1976 for a reason.

Does Disney have any long recurring characters in its new films? Most are threequels at most this generation.

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

#102

Post by judk » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 7:25 PM UTC

cafard wrote: post #48

Touche wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

About 20 years ago I was in Orlando (not to see Disney World, though we did). When the done-up characters came through the room where we were having breakfast, you could see the eyes get big as quarters on some little kids at a table over from us. I have to think this was recognition, since otherwise it should have scared them terribly.

Eh, when I was a kid visiting Orlando, I was in love with Holly Hound character, who I never saw before walking into Holiday Inn

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

#103

Post by judk » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 7:26 PM UTC

stinkytaco wrote: post #63

jessriedel wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

While I agree with you in principle, some of the specifics I take issue with: 1. Writing new Mickey stories - This is an odd legal/moral area for me. It's not unreasonable for Disney to want to protect Mickey and if you wrote a Mickey story, it's possible that people could feel that a 3rd party product is endorsed by Disney. That could affect Disney's future business. Distributing Steamboat Willy on YouTube will not.…

You can't trademark a function object like a costume.

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

#104

Post by nitrogen » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 7:28 PM UTC

salient wrote: post #31

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…

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), t…

I'd prefer a fixed copyright term that applies to everyone, possibly with different terms for different industries. That way rich and powerful studios enjoy the same protections as starving first-time novelists.

It would be grossly unfair for some small open source project to enter the public domain after five years, allowing commercial developers to fire most of their R&D staff and just assimilate five year old OSS without paying it forward. For that matter, any large publisher would just have to bury new authors in obscurity for five years to be able to steal their work for free.

I understand a compounding registration fee is meant to appease the behemoths who can afford it, but such a plan would end up working in their favor.

Copyright protects more than the ability to commercialize a work. The terms must be shortened, but they must also be blind to the wealth of the copyright owner.

I propose instead, as an example for discussion, a fixed term for duplication rights of 14 years from publication (+/- some years depending on industry), with a single low-cost renewal. For moral rights, life of the author plus a few years, with a 100 year maximum (people are living longer these days).

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

#105

Post by judk » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 7:30 PM UTC

toyg wrote: post #12

justin66 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's some interesting stuff on that list but I don't think it'd be competition to anything. I like the idea that the kids would be watching Bridge on the River Kwai instead of the latest recruitment video but it doesn't seem likely. Of course, the studios would lose the long-tail revenue from controlling movies like Bridge on the River Kwai (or licensing the movie rights to things like the old version of 3:10 to Y…

At this point, it's mostly about preservation. Kwai is one of a zillion war movies produced more than 40 years ago; unlike the bridge, that movie will forever endure, but so many of its contemporaries will disappear -- a fate entirely avoidable in this age of long-tail hyper-specialized scholarly studies, unlimited data capacity and worldwide p2p redundancy. Art will be lost because of unbridled greed, and this is th…

Do we need the zillions of other movies? At some point, we need to curate to not be overwhelmed

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

#106

Post by judk » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 7:33 PM UTC

res0nat0r wrote: post #11

pessimizer wrote: post #2

If this stuff did start to enter the public domain after 28+28 years, the modern entertainment industry would be screwed because they would have to compete with it. Rationally, they'd rather it burned than free.

Burned? Blah. The Cat in the Hat, Atlas Shrugged and probably others from that list are still popular. The books are still being printed and sold, not being hidden away from society.

If they weren't still copyrighted, new media sellers would want them destroyed

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

#107

Post by throwawaykf03 » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 7:39 PM UTC

acjohnson55 wrote: post #78

salient wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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), t…

I like the sound of that a lot. If your copyright is really profitable, you should be able to afford to pay for its protection. Should this perhaps apply to patent law as well?

For patents, you do have to pay maintenance fees to renew a patent at the 3.5, 7.5 and 11.5 year marks after issuance to keep it active, else it goes abandoned. A vast number of patents go un-renewed and lapse that (1) few patents turn out to be "profitable", and (2) most patents don't last their full terms.

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

#108

Post by will_brown » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 7:40 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #74

will_brown wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What tangible difference in incentive exists for creating new works if your protection is 60 years or 1000 years after you die? You think Disney or anyone else will invest if they lose their copyright protections in 60 years? No, it is stability that encourages creation and investment. >Information cannot be permanently locked behind a paywall, especially as it becomes important to study it historically That is the…

>You think Disney or anyone else will invest if they lose their copyright protections in 60 years? Is this an appeal to imagination? Yes I do, because I'm going to speculate that most of the income derived from a creative work is extracted in its first 60 years, and going to mention the historical fact that none of the media created 60 years ago was expected to be marketable 60 years later, and was often just destroy…

I am being taken out of context, I am not talking about making money I am talking about copy right protection. Disney has a vested interest, whether making money or not on a work, that Joe Schmo does not start reproducing a given work 1 to 1 and selling it as their own.

You may be right most income is derived from a work in its first 60 years, or that media created 60 years ago was not expected to be marketable 60 years later. Though I do not know this to be a historical fact, 60 years ago (1953) there was plenty of evidence to suggest a given work by a US author has plenty of commercial appeal after a mere 60 years of existence (Walden Pond, Civil Disobedience, Uncle Tom's Cabin, almost any Mark Twain novel).

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

#109

Post by throwawaykf03 » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 7:47 PM UTC

kriro wrote: post #88

The irony that Atlas Shrugged is on the list and massively protected by government IP law is deliciously sad. More interesting is that Tesla is part of the class of 2014 for 70 year countries :) 50 year countries get some nice additions (some real heavyweights): Robert Frost, Sylvia Plath, William Carlos Williams, Louis MacNeice, Jean Cocteau, C. S. Lewis, Aldous Huxley

Irony? Rand was a very strong proponent of IP rights. From a quick search:

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/patents_and_copyrights.htm...

http://hallingblog.com/ayn-rand-on-intellectual-property/com...

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

#110

Post by nitrogen » Tue, Dec 31, 2013, 7:47 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #91

aestra wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't just about "stealing." Allowing works to enter the public domain actually encourages more works to be created. People are free to remake and remix works in the public domain. Think: A REAL lot of old Disney movies (Alice and Wonderland, Jungle Book, Pinocchio...) Pride and Prejudice with Zombies That Romeo and Juliet movie with Leonardo DiCaprio and guns. A Christmas Carol in play form (it lends itself reall…

Your post is very helpful because of the examples. Lets take the Disney example. Lets assume the non-disney original Snow White had a Copyright and was not in the public domain. That does not mean Disney's version violates the copyright, it is very likely there was enough change in Disney's version from the original that Disney would not be found to infringe. Pride and Prejudice with Zombies: Assuming the creator of…

Are you willing to put you interpretation of copyright to the test? Why don't you write a modern retelling of Cinderella based on Disney's version and see how far you get. Next try a remix between Cinderella, Harry Potter, and the leaked Windows source code and see what happens.