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

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 of a challenge for this practically. (VHS and DVD releases are probably subject to a new copyright, remastering is often copyrightable.) If all extant accessible versions of a work are under copyright, then the work being in the public domain is only theoretical.

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 their work: Rowling is rich.

Secondarily, by inspiring other works. Fifty Shades of Grey started out as Twilight fan fiction. Art inspires more art. Copyright hinders this process.

Based on the above, copyright should now be much shorter: on the order of a few years.

In the past it took time to extract value from a work. Successful books had dozens of printings. Shipping books around the world was slow. Discovery of material to adapt into film took time. Note, this wasn't universally true: the Gone With the Wind film adaptation happened only three years after the book was published.

But take for example the Lord of the Rings books. They were published in the UK in 1954 and 1955, but some sort of copyright issue/loophole caused them to be widely available in the U.S. in the 1960s, before authorized editions came out. When they did become available, authorized editions then had a note that included a phrase something along the lines of, "Those having a courtesy for living authors (at least), will purchase this edition (of the book) and no other."

In any case, now with the internet and digital media, the majority of the value for most publications should be available within just a few years of release. As such, the balance between the time allotted for initial value production and the value as material to inspire other works should shift forward substantially.

If I were setting copyright law, I'd probably make it something like 5 years automatically, with extensions available yearly after that by filing inexpensive paperwork, up to a maximum of 10(?) years.

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 going on here if it is only viewed through the lens of copyright. While it would be easy to dismiss trademarking a character in most fictional works as doing an end-run around copyright law, The Mouse appears to have been a fairly consistent and identifiable part of Disney's image for decades. In the casual meaning of the word, it has been a trademark of the company. There is also a question of how the evolution of the character plays a role. As far as I can tell, Steamboat Willy is dead an Mickey took his place. Disney's trademarking of Steamboat Willy can be construed as an attempt to do an end-run around copyright law, but the visually similar Mickey has had a more enduring (and endearing) history.

Or perhaps certain types of trademarks, in the legal sense, should have a limited duration as well. I don't know of many companies that have maintained an immutable corporate image across decades simply because it does not make sense. Culture changes, and companies should be adapting with the times.

Other benefits of this approach: registration would make it much easier to identify works out of copyright and it would be much easier for the public to reclaim abandoned works.