3 ms·

I think the world would be completely fine without a copyrighted C3PO or Robocop. George Lucas didn’t have billions of merchandising revenue in mind when workin

by lovecg 3y ago

I think the world would be completely fine without a copyrighted C3PO or Robocop. George Lucas didn’t have billions of merchandising revenue in mind when working on his wild and thought unlikely to be successful science fiction movie in the 70s. Robocop was also a labor of love. We don’t really need Nth Star Wars sequel powered by those extra profits. The art form could be healthier overall.

livinginfear 3y ago
> George Lucas didn’t have billions of merchandising revenue in mind... Doesn't copyright stop other people from making billions in merchandising revenue off of George Lucas' ideas without his consent? > We don’t really need Nth Star Wars sequel powered by those extra profits. Without a copyrighted C3PO, he could start turning up in just about anyone's derivative works. There could be horrible Star wars sequels forever, or TV ads with C3PO selling household cleaning products.
- kevindamm 3y ago
  "As a protocol droid, I cannot actually recommend the best smelling cleaning product, but these are the most purchased cleaning products:" ...followed by a semi-hallucinated list containing at least a few being marketed by C3PO.
- lovecg 3y ago
  Centralization makes a difference here I think. Disney built an impressive machine where everything feeds on everything else. The problem is not so much bad sequels per se, it’s all the marketing that goes into making sure they solidly occupy their corner of our mindshare and force the whole industry to compete churning out more and more subpar sequels. If one company would build a Star Wars theme park, another produced toys etc. etc. this might not be a huge concern.
6gvONxR4sf7o 3y ago
Fine if they weren't copyrighted today, or ever? Because if copyright was eliminated the day Star Wars was released, other people would have copied the film reels and charged for entry, and Lucas would have hardly made a cent. Or if copyright was eliminated the day he went looking for funding, it wouldn't have ever been made. Personally, I think the world's a little richer for star wars's existence.
- lovecg 3y ago
  You make a good point, there’s a difference in copyrighting exact works vs. the characters or the story that the work is made up of. I’m not arguing for removing literal copyright (though the terms should be shorter). But I think it’s fine if other people rushed to make their own Star Wars movies after it came out. Hardcore fans are pretty good at deciding what’s “canon” vs. not anyway, and the rest of us don’t care as long as the work is of good quality. Would it matter if the same Spiderman or Batman movie that’s remade once a decade could be made by literally anyone without paying royalties? It could make for richer content I’d think.
  - Nevermark 3y ago
    The only problem with this view, is: > "the rest of us don’t care as long as the work is of good quality" Copyright protects Disney. But it also protects every creative author, no matter how disadvantaged, from mass shareholder driven behemoths. Today "Disney likes your work" is ear music. Without copyright it would be a death nell.
    - Teever 3y ago
      So how can we modify copyright so that it protects the little guy more than it protects Disney?
      - from-nibly 3y ago
        That's not how laws work.
        Teever 3y ago
        What do you mean by that? Do you mean that law has a tendency to work the other way, in that it protects the big guy at the expense of the little guy because of extensive lobbying from the well moneyed big guy, or that justice is blind and it effects all equally? If you're thinking the former I could agree with that on some level and would say that what I'm asking in my original comment is merely aspirational, but if you're suggesting the latter I'd merely point to the former and say that this is the status quo.
bkudria 3y ago
> George Lucas didn’t have billions of merchandising revenue in mind From https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1997/01/06/why-is-the-force-still-with-us-star-wars-george-lucas https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1997/01/06/why-is-the-for... > Lucas’s most significant business decision—one that seemed laughable to the Fox executives at the time—was to forgo his option to receive an additional five-hundred-thousand-dollar fee from Fox for directing “Star Wars” and to take the merchandising and sequel rights instead.

by lovecg 3y ago

livinginfear 3y ago

> George Lucas didn’t have billions of merchandising revenue in mind... Doesn't copyright stop other people from making billions in merchandising revenue off of George Lucas' ideas without his consent? > We don’t really need Nth Star Wars sequel powered by those extra profits. Without a copyrighted C3PO, he could start turning up in just about anyone's derivative works. There could be horrible Star wars sequels forever, or TV ads with C3PO selling household cleaning products.

kevindamm 3y ago
"As a protocol droid, I cannot actually recommend the best smelling cleaning product, but these are the most purchased cleaning products:" ...followed by a semi-hallucinated list containing at least a few being marketed by C3PO.
lovecg 3y ago
Centralization makes a difference here I think. Disney built an impressive machine where everything feeds on everything else. The problem is not so much bad sequels per se, it’s all the marketing that goes into making sure they solidly occupy their corner of our mindshare and force the whole industry to compete churning out more and more subpar sequels. If one company would build a Star Wars theme park, another produced toys etc. etc. this might not be a huge concern.

6gvONxR4sf7o 3y ago

Fine if they weren't copyrighted today, or ever? Because if copyright was eliminated the day Star Wars was released, other people would have copied the film reels and charged for entry, and Lucas would have hardly made a cent. Or if copyright was eliminated the day he went looking for funding, it wouldn't have ever been made. Personally, I think the world's a little richer for star wars's existence.

lovecg 3y ago
You make a good point, there’s a difference in copyrighting exact works vs. the characters or the story that the work is made up of. I’m not arguing for removing literal copyright (though the terms should be shorter). But I think it’s fine if other people rushed to make their own Star Wars movies after it came out. Hardcore fans are pretty good at deciding what’s “canon” vs. not anyway, and the rest of us don’t care as long as the work is of good quality. Would it matter if the same Spiderman or Batman movie that’s remade once a decade could be made by literally anyone without paying royalties? It could make for richer content I’d think.
- Nevermark 3y ago
  The only problem with this view, is: > "the rest of us don’t care as long as the work is of good quality" Copyright protects Disney. But it also protects every creative author, no matter how disadvantaged, from mass shareholder driven behemoths. Today "Disney likes your work" is ear music. Without copyright it would be a death nell.
  - Teever 3y ago
    So how can we modify copyright so that it protects the little guy more than it protects Disney?
    - from-nibly 3y ago
      That's not how laws work.
      - Teever 3y ago
        What do you mean by that? Do you mean that law has a tendency to work the other way, in that it protects the big guy at the expense of the little guy because of extensive lobbying from the well moneyed big guy, or that justice is blind and it effects all equally? If you're thinking the former I could agree with that on some level and would say that what I'm asking in my original comment is merely aspirational, but if you're suggesting the latter I'd merely point to the former and say that this is the status quo.

bkudria 3y ago

> George Lucas didn’t have billions of merchandising revenue in mind From https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1997/01/06/why-is-the-force-still-with-us-star-wars-george-lucas https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1997/01/06/why-is-the-for... > Lucas’s most significant business decision—one that seemed laughable to the Fox executives at the time—was to forgo his option to receive an additional five-hundred-thousand-dollar fee from Fox for directing “Star Wars” and to take the merchandising and sequel rights instead.