4 ms·

on the other hand, I don't think Mickey should go public domain.

jqgatsby 4y ago
What is casually asserted can be casually denied. Can you elaborate your reason for thinking this? Is it a special carve-out for Mickey, or would you also include, say, Alice in Wonderland?
- tremon 4y ago
  Indeed. Why should Mickey be governed by different rules than Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Cinderella, The Sorcerer's Apprentice, Pinocchio or The Ice Queen?
noasaservice 4y ago
In a way, Mickey Mouse is under both copyright and trademark. If someone wanted to do "The New Stories of Mickey Mouse" they should be free to do so. If someone wanted to act as Disney using Micky Mouse, then they should be sued into oblivion for acting as another company.
- xani_ 4y ago
  That's a fair compromise. Original author owns the rights to a given piece of art in whole and trademark from title, so they can profit off their work and make next title without being mistaken for someone else. Everyone else is free to do with IP, do remixes etc. and if they make something with original IP that is better than originals, so be it ,competition actually working.
  - noasaservice 4y ago
    To be fair, I am a huge proponent of most trademarks. (general shape, color, and such I'm not a fan of) A trademark means if I buy AMD, I'm not getting "shitty rebrand of chip 10y old by jank fab". Or it means if I buy branded food, I know what I'm getting. Trademarks are essential for the protection to know the goods you buy from a company are what you're expecting. And that's why I'm realllllly curious when a whole bunch of big companies sue Amazon for allowing counterfeit co-mingling (or being charged $$$$$ for separate SKUs), relating to trademark dilution. This is straight up provable damage.
rowanG077 4y ago
Why? I see no reason why it shouldn't go public domain. If anything it might be possible wash some of the stain of Mickey Mouse.
retrac 4y ago
I think the best example to work with is Star Wars, or maybe The Lord of the Rings. The harm of eternal copyright is probably best demonstrated with these. They've both entered popular understanding, becoming casually referenced all over the place. "We need to make a little stop in Mordor first" is probably more widely-understood than most references to Greek mythology at this point. The people who grew up in the culture permeated with such stories are stunted expressively. Because they're denied the use of an ever-growing share of the tropes and characters of the common culture. Many Disney films themselves are retellings of classic stories in the public domain. If you want to reference the original Cindarella, or Greek mythology, or Oliver Twist, you're free to do so. You cannot do that with Luke Skywalker, or Aragorn. Now, maybe you shouldn't be able to within the author's life. But how many centuries should we keep this privilege? Would you or I (or Disney) be able to tell a new story about Hercules if copyright had been around 2000 years ago? Imagine Shakespeare still under copyright! No Hamlet or Macbeth characters in any other works without permission. We can strike several important 20th century books right there. In the future, the equivalent of Shakespeare will still be under copyright long, long after they are dead. Derivation and reuse are normal in art. Disney can borrow from the public domain to make Cindarella, but it in turn will never become public domain.
- anjbe 4y ago
  Star Wars is a particularly salient example because the original cuts that made the films such cultural icons are completely unavailable from anyone other than third‐party sellers, due to the wishes of the (former) rights holder. After the Special Editions were released, the theatrical editions made it onto DVD one time, and never did again. J.J. Abrams has indicated that there are difficulties behind the scenes (perhaps some clause in the Disney purchase) that prevent the originals from being made available for sale. So people who want to avoid the CGI and bad redubs of the Special Editions are stuck scrounging eBay, or more likely, grabbing an “unofficial” scan of the theatrical editions.
  - thefringthing 4y ago
    > the theatrical editions made it onto DVD one time Even then, it wasn't really what was being asked for by fans. The goal at that time was to get LucasFilm to release the pre-Special Edition versions of the movies, which were available on VHS and Laserdisc, on DVD at DVD resolution. LucasFilm insisted that it was impossible to reassemble the negatives and that they had no suitable print from which to produce a new digital scan. Instead, they released digitized copies of the Laserdiscs on DVD bonus discs. Since then, enthusiasts have managed to produce Blu-ray resolution versions of the original movies first by piecing together a variety of sources and later by acquiring and scanning surviving prints.
moffkalast 4y ago
At this point it should've been public domain twice over, it's old as dirt.
aidenn0 4y ago
What about the ballet The Sleeping Beauty? Disney used Tchaikovsky's music heavily in their adaption despite it being less than 70 years after his death (and even further from being 95 years from its premiere). That's always my go-to example for copyright because: 1. Disney has benefited both from extending copyright and from the previous shorter duration of copyright 2. The fact that a work from the 19th century would still be under copyright in 1959 is astonishing to many people 3. Disney's Sleeping Beauty, despite opening to mixed reviews, is generally well received today and is a great example of what we are missing out on; this work (judged "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" by the LoC) could not have been made if today's rules existed in 1959.
zeruch 4y ago
I do.

What is casually asserted can be casually denied. Can you elaborate your reason for thinking this? Is it a special carve-out for Mickey, or would you also include, say, Alice in Wonderland?

tremon 4y ago
Indeed. Why should Mickey be governed by different rules than Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Cinderella, The Sorcerer's Apprentice, Pinocchio or The Ice Queen?

noasaservice 4y ago

In a way, Mickey Mouse is under both copyright and trademark. If someone wanted to do "The New Stories of Mickey Mouse" they should be free to do so. If someone wanted to act as Disney using Micky Mouse, then they should be sued into oblivion for acting as another company.

xani_ 4y ago
That's a fair compromise. Original author owns the rights to a given piece of art in whole and trademark from title, so they can profit off their work and make next title without being mistaken for someone else. Everyone else is free to do with IP, do remixes etc. and if they make something with original IP that is better than originals, so be it ,competition actually working.
- noasaservice 4y ago
  To be fair, I am a huge proponent of most trademarks. (general shape, color, and such I'm not a fan of) A trademark means if I buy AMD, I'm not getting "shitty rebrand of chip 10y old by jank fab". Or it means if I buy branded food, I know what I'm getting. Trademarks are essential for the protection to know the goods you buy from a company are what you're expecting. And that's why I'm realllllly curious when a whole bunch of big companies sue Amazon for allowing counterfeit co-mingling (or being charged $$$$$ for separate SKUs), relating to trademark dilution. This is straight up provable damage.

rowanG077 4y ago

Why? I see no reason why it shouldn't go public domain. If anything it might be possible wash some of the stain of Mickey Mouse.

retrac 4y ago

I think the best example to work with is Star Wars, or maybe The Lord of the Rings. The harm of eternal copyright is probably best demonstrated with these. They've both entered popular understanding, becoming casually referenced all over the place. "We need to make a little stop in Mordor first" is probably more widely-understood than most references to Greek mythology at this point. The people who grew up in the culture permeated with such stories are stunted expressively. Because they're denied the use of an ever-growing share of the tropes and characters of the common culture. Many Disney films themselves are retellings of classic stories in the public domain. If you want to reference the original Cindarella, or Greek mythology, or Oliver Twist, you're free to do so. You cannot do that with Luke Skywalker, or Aragorn. Now, maybe you shouldn't be able to within the author's life. But how many centuries should we keep this privilege? Would you or I (or Disney) be able to tell a new story about Hercules if copyright had been around 2000 years ago? Imagine Shakespeare still under copyright! No Hamlet or Macbeth characters in any other works without permission. We can strike several important 20th century books right there. In the future, the equivalent of Shakespeare will still be under copyright long, long after they are dead. Derivation and reuse are normal in art. Disney can borrow from the public domain to make Cindarella, but it in turn will never become public domain.

anjbe 4y ago
Star Wars is a particularly salient example because the original cuts that made the films such cultural icons are completely unavailable from anyone other than third‐party sellers, due to the wishes of the (former) rights holder. After the Special Editions were released, the theatrical editions made it onto DVD one time, and never did again. J.J. Abrams has indicated that there are difficulties behind the scenes (perhaps some clause in the Disney purchase) that prevent the originals from being made available for sale. So people who want to avoid the CGI and bad redubs of the Special Editions are stuck scrounging eBay, or more likely, grabbing an “unofficial” scan of the theatrical editions.
- thefringthing 4y ago
  > the theatrical editions made it onto DVD one time Even then, it wasn't really what was being asked for by fans. The goal at that time was to get LucasFilm to release the pre-Special Edition versions of the movies, which were available on VHS and Laserdisc, on DVD at DVD resolution. LucasFilm insisted that it was impossible to reassemble the negatives and that they had no suitable print from which to produce a new digital scan. Instead, they released digitized copies of the Laserdiscs on DVD bonus discs. Since then, enthusiasts have managed to produce Blu-ray resolution versions of the original movies first by piecing together a variety of sources and later by acquiring and scanning surviving prints.

moffkalast 4y ago

At this point it should've been public domain twice over, it's old as dirt.

aidenn0 4y ago

What about the ballet The Sleeping Beauty? Disney used Tchaikovsky's music heavily in their adaption despite it being less than 70 years after his death (and even further from being 95 years from its premiere). That's always my go-to example for copyright because: 1. Disney has benefited both from extending copyright and from the previous shorter duration of copyright 2. The fact that a work from the 19th century would still be under copyright in 1959 is astonishing to many people 3. Disney's Sleeping Beauty, despite opening to mixed reviews, is generally well received today and is a great example of what we are missing out on; this work (judged "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" by the LoC) could not have been made if today's rules existed in 1959.

zeruch 4y ago

I do.