6 ms·

We need to create a sort of hybrid copyright and trademark that will solve the mickey mouse problem. So that a company can keep their actually used characters,

krasin 11y ago
Nope. We need to make the copyright to last 5 years for exclusive monopoly, and more 10 years for making profit out of the copyrighted work. And make Mickey Mouse public domain.
- acomjean 11y ago
  I always thought an easy solution amenable to people and companies is you should have to pay to keep up the copyright after a certain time. Maybe start copyright at 40 years. If you find the work valuable you could register to extend it. If you don't find it valuable and don't bother to register the work it falls into public domain. Seems like an easy solution.
- Retric 11y ago
  IMO, copyright does two things. Protects direct income, and prevents derivative works. I think ~5-20 years to prevent copying is reasonable, but derivative works could benefit from longer term protection. As in, you can't make a movie based on a book in that author’s lifespan. IMO, this is not about profit, so much as artistic integrity. It's also likely to pass the Disney test. They are not making money from Steamboat Willy it's all about protecting the image.
  - thescriptkiddie 11y ago
    > but derivative works could benefit from longer term protection. As in, you can't make a movie based on a book in that author’s lifespan. Why? If no derivative works can be made within the original author's lifespan, that would mean that the author's audience would likewise rarely live to see any. By the time the author is dead, their works are might be irrelevant or forgotten. Who is going to remix them then? Copyright terms lasting lifetimes rob entire generations of their culture. The original length of copyright in the US was only 14 years.
    - Retric 11y ago
      We already see lot's of copying for any popular work. AKA CSI: Miami. And, you can generally do fanfiction as long as your not trying to make money from it. I just want to minimize the amount of me too pandering that follows any popular new thing.
forgottenpass 11y ago
We need to create a sort of hybrid copyright and trademark that will solve the mickey mouse problem. So that a company can keep their actually used characters, but that unused stuff goes into the public domain after 25 years plus not being used in the past 5 years. Why bother? Is there a good reason in the public interest to keep Mickey out of the public domain, or is this a workaround to do as much in the public interest while submitting to the fact Disney has enough money to block the otherwise status quo ending of copyright. If the former, I'd suggest that you have a warped vision of how Disney's profitability is the public good, and secretly think you're lying. Or if it's the later, our democracy has some really fundamental problems and caving on this just makes them worse.
- placeybordeaux 11y ago
  It's not that the public should be concerned for Disney's profitability, but that it is much easier to simply split the cases and let Disney have a much smaller victory in just the space they desire rather than a larger victory that affects all of copyright.
  - forgottenpass 11y ago
    I can get that. But that reasoning rests on an admission our democracy is incapable maintaining principles for no other reason than the power of corporate lobbying. (As you've already said the public shouldn't be concerned with Disney's profitability, so I'll assume that their lack profitability doesn't represent any threat to the nation.) If someone wants to argue that such a state of affairs is fine, OK. We can have that conversation. But I see it as a fundamental threat to the rule of law.
    - saint_fiasco 11y ago
      What's wrong with admitting that the system doesn't work? If it's true, then we should act in consequence instead of flipping out at the suggestion of palliative measures. It's like refusing to consider measures to mitigate harm caused by global warming because you don't want to "admit" that corporate interests make it very difficult to prevent global warming.
thescriptkiddie 11y ago
Is copyright - or a novel legal structure as you suggest - really necessary to "protect" Micky Mouse? Isn't trademark enough? If I understand correctly, the expiration of copyright of Disney's works will bring the individual works into the public domain one at a time, but the trademark on the characters still stands as long as Disney enforces it.
cmsmith 11y ago
Easy. Automatic copyright lasts until 5 years after the creator's death (or 10 years total for works by corporations). You can extend copyright indefinitely, but there is a fee that increases exponentially with time. I'd suggest $100 for years 5 through 10, and $1 billion for years 75 through 80.
Zigurd 11y ago
Why? Disney can continue to use out-of-copyright characters. The court has, inexplicably, accepted the lawyering that "limited time" has no meaning. That's what needs to change.
fweespeech 11y ago
Tbh, after 10 years, I think IP should just expire altogether for non-commercial use.

krasin 11y ago

Nope. We need to make the copyright to last 5 years for exclusive monopoly, and more 10 years for making profit out of the copyrighted work. And make Mickey Mouse public domain.

acomjean 11y ago
I always thought an easy solution amenable to people and companies is you should have to pay to keep up the copyright after a certain time. Maybe start copyright at 40 years. If you find the work valuable you could register to extend it. If you don't find it valuable and don't bother to register the work it falls into public domain. Seems like an easy solution.
Retric 11y ago
IMO, copyright does two things. Protects direct income, and prevents derivative works. I think ~5-20 years to prevent copying is reasonable, but derivative works could benefit from longer term protection. As in, you can't make a movie based on a book in that author’s lifespan. IMO, this is not about profit, so much as artistic integrity. It's also likely to pass the Disney test. They are not making money from Steamboat Willy it's all about protecting the image.
- thescriptkiddie 11y ago
  > but derivative works could benefit from longer term protection. As in, you can't make a movie based on a book in that author’s lifespan. Why? If no derivative works can be made within the original author's lifespan, that would mean that the author's audience would likewise rarely live to see any. By the time the author is dead, their works are might be irrelevant or forgotten. Who is going to remix them then? Copyright terms lasting lifetimes rob entire generations of their culture. The original length of copyright in the US was only 14 years.
  - Retric 11y ago
    We already see lot's of copying for any popular work. AKA CSI: Miami. And, you can generally do fanfiction as long as your not trying to make money from it. I just want to minimize the amount of me too pandering that follows any popular new thing.

forgottenpass 11y ago

We need to create a sort of hybrid copyright and trademark that will solve the mickey mouse problem. So that a company can keep their actually used characters, but that unused stuff goes into the public domain after 25 years plus not being used in the past 5 years. Why bother? Is there a good reason in the public interest to keep Mickey out of the public domain, or is this a workaround to do as much in the public interest while submitting to the fact Disney has enough money to block the otherwise status quo ending of copyright. If the former, I'd suggest that you have a warped vision of how Disney's profitability is the public good, and secretly think you're lying. Or if it's the later, our democracy has some really fundamental problems and caving on this just makes them worse.

placeybordeaux 11y ago
It's not that the public should be concerned for Disney's profitability, but that it is much easier to simply split the cases and let Disney have a much smaller victory in just the space they desire rather than a larger victory that affects all of copyright.
- forgottenpass 11y ago
  I can get that. But that reasoning rests on an admission our democracy is incapable maintaining principles for no other reason than the power of corporate lobbying. (As you've already said the public shouldn't be concerned with Disney's profitability, so I'll assume that their lack profitability doesn't represent any threat to the nation.) If someone wants to argue that such a state of affairs is fine, OK. We can have that conversation. But I see it as a fundamental threat to the rule of law.
  - saint_fiasco 11y ago
    What's wrong with admitting that the system doesn't work? If it's true, then we should act in consequence instead of flipping out at the suggestion of palliative measures. It's like refusing to consider measures to mitigate harm caused by global warming because you don't want to "admit" that corporate interests make it very difficult to prevent global warming.

thescriptkiddie 11y ago

Is copyright - or a novel legal structure as you suggest - really necessary to "protect" Micky Mouse? Isn't trademark enough? If I understand correctly, the expiration of copyright of Disney's works will bring the individual works into the public domain one at a time, but the trademark on the characters still stands as long as Disney enforces it.

cmsmith 11y ago

Easy. Automatic copyright lasts until 5 years after the creator's death (or 10 years total for works by corporations). You can extend copyright indefinitely, but there is a fee that increases exponentially with time. I'd suggest $100 for years 5 through 10, and $1 billion for years 75 through 80.

Zigurd 11y ago

Why? Disney can continue to use out-of-copyright characters. The court has, inexplicably, accepted the lawyering that "limited time" has no meaning. That's what needs to change.

fweespeech 11y ago

Tbh, after 10 years, I think IP should just expire altogether for non-commercial use.