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

All sound recordings prior to 1923 will enter the US public domain in 2022

publicdomainreview.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 233 posts

Re: All sound recordings prior to 1923 will enter the US public domain in 2022

#161

Post by 9000 »

not2b wrote: post #158
VictorPath wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disney was actually founded on Alice in Wonderland, Mickey Mouse was created years later. At the time, Alice in Wonderland would have still been copyrighted if it were under the copyright regime Disney etc. instituted since. The corporation pulled the ladder up after it. Incidentally, Mickey Mouse was in many ways a ripoff of Universal's Oswald the Rabbit.

Incorrect: Mickey Mouse was created in the 20s, Disney's Alice in Wonderland was released in 1951. You're right that the book would still have been copyrighted. Oswald the Rabbit was also created by Walt Disney, in 1927, and sold to Universal. He then created Mickey Mouse as a replacement character for his own movie.

They aren't referencing the 1951 movie, but instead the 1920s shorts series called Alice Comedies, the first of which is literally called Alice's Wonderland.

These weren't really retellings of the original stories, but it would nevertheless not be hard to imagine they would count as a derivative work under modern law and would thus have been illegal to produce without a licensing deal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Comedies

Re: All sound recordings prior to 1923 will enter the US public domain in 2022

#162

Post by grishka »

codyb wrote: post #150
grishka wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh. A movie studio. Yes, my proposal also has a nice side effect of filtering out those who are in it for the money, not self-expression. The world would become a better place if there were no "entertainment industry".

No entertainment industry? So... nobody could sit and create a movie studio or a record label? What a weird thing to rail against. I'm certainly unconvinced the world would be magically better without people organizing to produce content. Maybe there's some issues with copyrights, but as far as I can tell, almost any organization would attempt to preserve profits. We, as a people, then go through and create legislati…

> almost any organization would attempt to preserve profits.

Often at the expense of everything else, including common sense. Despite their current revenues already covering their expenses, many times over.

> But the idea people can't get together and make movies, that's a new one.

They can, but they will own shares in them, either split equally or proportionally to their contribution.

Re: All sound recordings prior to 1923 will enter the US public domain in 2022

#163

Post by datavirtue »

adolph wrote: post #130
lapetitejort wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> those stories have always been public domain and you can write a book or movie about them with no problem. Those stories were retelling of stories which were retelling of stories which were... Disney made it law that no one is allowed to retell their stories but them. Approaching or alluding to their retelling can carry stiff penalties. It's antithetical to a universal human institution that has existed since befor…

This is interesting to think about. The Disney retellings in some ways are evolutionary winners that are also dead ends. Outside of Disney they can’t evolve unlike pre-Disney. The Disney retellings are so popular that other retellings are almost extinct. When Disney goes away, does the story lineages disappear? Do copies of older retellings resurge? Do totally different story lineages take the place of the Disney sto…

Those stories are dead. Most people think Disney came up with all of their ideas and have no idea that most of them stem from ancient stories--some existed before writing as we know it.

They will probably dig up these stories from Sumeria (tablets in UK) or other yet un-studied texts some day and rehash them completely anew...starting the cycle again.

Heck, the bible has a lot of good stuff if you can shed the religious/Christian connotations.

Re: All sound recordings prior to 1923 will enter the US public domain in 2022

#164

Post by Dylan16807 »

ipaddr wrote: post #131
mywittyname wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Three years is probably too short, but certainly something less than 30 years. That gives people plenty of time to enjoy the profits from their work (basically their entire adult lives) while allowing it into the public domain while it is still somewhat useful. I don't think the system would function without transferable copyrights. A movie might have 10,000 people who've contributed to it. Managing the copyrights wi…

Most movies make most of their money week one. Most songs make the bulk of income within a 3 month period. 3 years is longer than necessary. Perhaps this would affect less known artists. I would be willing to keep the copyright until the first 100,000 or 1,000,0000 worth of product is sold.

> Most movies make most of their money week one.

Sure, under the current system.

The question is how many people that would have bought the media would just wait out the copyright. Once you're into these short lengths of time, it's a lot.

Re: All sound recordings prior to 1923 will enter the US public domain in 2022

#165

Post by btilly »

kristopolous wrote: post #123
hippie_queen wrote: post #17

Can't wait to finally sample Thomas Edison on the phonograph for my Soundcloud tracks, and not having to worry about the police knocking at my door!

Hey be careful what you wish for! Check out "I am the Edison phonograph" from 1906 https://youtu.be/EQC9CjFezrQ I'd use that, totally would.

Sadly, that's still under copyright.

The problem was that various music copyrights were being dated from the 1970s for historical reasons despite the music itself being much older. Congress passed a law fixing a whole lot of that in one lump. Which is why music from the 1920s becomes public domain at the same time as movies from the early 1930s.

Re: All sound recordings prior to 1923 will enter the US public domain in 2022

#166

Post by Bayart »

Hokusai wrote: post #73
danielrpa wrote: post #5

75-80 years late, so wonderful

So, anyone that had a personal attachment to that music is dead. The current goal of copyright is to let companies own the culture you grew with. All the movies, music, books and games that defined who you are will not enter the public domain until you are dead or very old. Companies like Disney were founded on well known stories. They will not allow anybody else too accomplish the same.

>So, anyone that had a personal attachment to that music is dead.

1923 is right around the first few recordings of country blues, and I've got a few of them in my regular playlist. We're not dead, there are dozens of us !

Re: All sound recordings prior to 1923 will enter the US public domain in 2022

#167

Post by californical »

grishka wrote: post #162
codyb wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No entertainment industry? So... nobody could sit and create a movie studio or a record label? What a weird thing to rail against. I'm certainly unconvinced the world would be magically better without people organizing to produce content. Maybe there's some issues with copyrights, but as far as I can tell, almost any organization would attempt to preserve profits. We, as a people, then go through and create legislati…

> almost any organization would attempt to preserve profits. Often at the expense of everything else, including common sense. Despite their current revenues already covering their expenses, many times over. > But the idea people can't get together and make movies, that's a new one. They can, but they will own shares in them, either split equally or proportionally to their contribution.

How are there shares if there’s no copyright? Do you own 10% of a movie that’s worth $0 since anyone can copy and distribute it for no cost?

Re: All sound recordings prior to 1923 will enter the US public domain in 2022

#168

Post by kragen »

dahart wrote: post #138
kragen wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this is mostly correct, the mention of derivative works is a red herring; derivative works are copyrightable, they're just also subject to the copyright of the original.

Derivative works are relevant because they’re subject to the original copyright, yes? Please note I didn’t say all derivative works are not copyrightable; I’m saying that a basic remaster won’t even qualify as a derivative work.

ok

Re: All sound recordings prior to 1923 will enter the US public domain in 2022

#169

Post by chrisco255 »

lapetitejort wrote: post #120
chrisco255 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disney was founded on Mickey Mouse. Yes, they made major motion pictures out of old myths and legends, like Cinderella and Robin Hood, but those stories have always been public domain and you can write a book or movie about them with no problem.

> those stories have always been public domain and you can write a book or movie about them with no problem. Those stories were retelling of stories which were retelling of stories which were... Disney made it law that no one is allowed to retell their stories but them. Approaching or alluding to their retelling can carry stiff penalties. It's antithetical to a universal human institution that has existed since befor…

I'm not a fan of Disney's egregious lobbying for extensions to maximum copyright time, for what it's worth.

Agreed that by now it should be okay to make your own Mickey Mouse cartoon or merchandise and sell it without permission from Disney.

Re: All sound recordings prior to 1923 will enter the US public domain in 2022

#170

Post by bena »

grishka wrote: post #115
t-writescode wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2-3 years is no time at all. Someone could hand a movie studio a script in hopes of it being made a movie, the movie studio could wait 4 years, and then make the movie, with no harm to them whatsoever.

Huh. A movie studio. Yes, my proposal also has a nice side effect of filtering out those who are in it for the money, not self-expression. The world would become a better place if there were no "entertainment industry".

If you are in it for self-expression, you're entirely free to self-express to your heart's content. Copyright doesn't matter, publishers don't matter, studios don't matter.

The minute you want to express yourself to others, you're no longer in it for self-expression.

And regardless of your opinion on what should and should not exist, people should be fairly compensated for their endeavors, even if those endeavors are to create leisure activities for others.

Copyright is an attempt to enable creators to get compensation for their work. This is one thing the people who rail about the ease of reproduction miss. It was never about the difficulty of reproduction, it was always about the difficulty of creation.

How do we reward that when we are allowed to freely copy their efforts without the need to consider their contribution? It's one of the few things I like about a subscription or Patreon model. We're paying directly for the effort of creation.

Post reply on HN