4 ms·

As for the “fantastic four” solution, you don’t prevent that- as long as it’s actually distributed and available to interested parties for consumption. Creating

As for the “fantastic four” solution, you don’t prevent that- as long as it’s actually distributed and available to interested parties for consumption. Creating and distributing a “keep the IP alive” production is still a significantly higher barrier then we have today. As for the US abandoning the Berne convention- it was ratified by the senate, so the President, even this reality tv drama of an administration, can’t just drop out (unless their is some detail of the ratification instrument I’m unaware of.) I thankfully still believe there is enough left of the constitutional apparatus that there remain some bounds on Presidential power, even when the president might be doing what I want.

anoncake 7y ago
Making something that technically qualifies as a movie isn't a real hurdle. Get some people with a pulse (they don't have to be able to act), give them some costumes (amateur theatre groups can easily afford renting costumes) and a script (it doesn't have to make sense). Let them recite it and film them with your phone for 10 minutes. Done. If someone actually wants to watch this, they can rent a DRM'd Betamax tape (inventing this is certainly the most expensive step) for $999999/day. You could of course make sure the "movie" is actually available by regulating distribution and prices. But you can't regulate how movies are supposed to be made without seriously restricting freedom of art.
- topkai22 7y ago
  It's enough of a hurdle to open up a lot of culture. Maybe not Mara Jade since she is probably the most popular Disney owned character to never appear on film or TV, but the act of having to itemize, describe, track, and actively protect a "derivative work mark" is not going to be pursued for every minor character or box office flop. I doubt even Disney would find it worthwhile to create, produce, and distribute non-trivial content to protect every minor character listed in Wookiepedia from the Legends canon. The reason I picked trademark law as a metaphor was exactly because some formerly profitable brands have been abandoned and then revived by third parties over the years, so there is precedent. What constitutes abandonment of a "derivative work mark" ultimately would probably be a delineation the courts would make. I'd hope that in a sane implementation of this scheme your strawman wouldn't hold up. It would be pretty easy to demonstrate that next to no money was spent on the creation or marketing of the product, and no one bought it, so that could still be considered abandonment. That being said, it wouldn't take much to produce new IP the keeps the mark alive so long it as it was 1) actually the same concept as the original mark (Mara Jade can't star in a rom com set in New York City without lightsabers. (Also Disney should call me about putting Mara Jade in a Rom Com set in NYC WITH lightsabers, because that would be amazing.)) and 2) gets some limited degree of public recognition.

anoncake 7y ago

Making something that technically qualifies as a movie isn't a real hurdle. Get some people with a pulse (they don't have to be able to act), give them some costumes (amateur theatre groups can easily afford renting costumes) and a script (it doesn't have to make sense). Let them recite it and film them with your phone for 10 minutes. Done. If someone actually wants to watch this, they can rent a DRM'd Betamax tape (inventing this is certainly the most expensive step) for $999999/day. You could of course make sure the "movie" is actually available by regulating distribution and prices. But you can't regulate how movies are supposed to be made without seriously restricting freedom of art.

topkai22 7y ago
It's enough of a hurdle to open up a lot of culture. Maybe not Mara Jade since she is probably the most popular Disney owned character to never appear on film or TV, but the act of having to itemize, describe, track, and actively protect a "derivative work mark" is not going to be pursued for every minor character or box office flop. I doubt even Disney would find it worthwhile to create, produce, and distribute non-trivial content to protect every minor character listed in Wookiepedia from the Legends canon. The reason I picked trademark law as a metaphor was exactly because some formerly profitable brands have been abandoned and then revived by third parties over the years, so there is precedent. What constitutes abandonment of a "derivative work mark" ultimately would probably be a delineation the courts would make. I'd hope that in a sane implementation of this scheme your strawman wouldn't hold up. It would be pretty easy to demonstrate that next to no money was spent on the creation or marketing of the product, and no one bought it, so that could still be considered abandonment. That being said, it wouldn't take much to produce new IP the keeps the mark alive so long it as it was 1) actually the same concept as the original mark (Mara Jade can't star in a rom com set in New York City without lightsabers. (Also Disney should call me about putting Mara Jade in a Rom Com set in NYC WITH lightsabers, because that would be amazing.)) and 2) gets some limited degree of public recognition.