17 ms·

Writers who will be entering the public domain in 2015 in many countries

259 points by benbreen 12y ago

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
benbreen 12y ago
The French historian Marc Bloch is one of the ones who makes their runner's up list and deserves wider attention. He was shot by the Gestapo in 1944 and along with Fernand Braudel (who was himself a POW at the time) was the leader of the Annales School, arguably the most influential school of thought among professional historians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Bloch http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Bloch
audiodude 12y ago
In case anyone is wondering, once again nothing will enter the public domain in the United States because of Congress' perpetual habit of retroactively extending copyright on works. The next time anything will enter the public domain in the US is January 1, 2019. source: https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday
- IndianAstronaut 12y ago
  This is absurd and puts a huge damper on creative work.
  - mathattack 12y ago
    It seems like the work where a dedicated minority (who stand to collect royalties) pushes against an issue that mildly benefits the majority. Taxi medallions were a similar phenomenon pre-Lyft and pre-Uber.
    - aikah 12y ago
      try "disrupting" copyright,be ready for a swat team raiding your house. http://mashable.com/2012/08/08/kim-dotcom-raid/ http://mashable.com/2012/08/08/kim-dotcom-raid/ > Taxi medallions were a similar phenomenon pre-Lyft and pre-Uber. Neither Uber nor Lyft put an end to Taxi medallion system.
      - click170 12y ago
        I'm not sure if you're joking or not, but civil disobedience is a valid and legitimate form of protest. If you disagree with a law, ignore it. If enough people do the same, the burden from enforcing the law becomes too much and it simply stops being enforced or is legislated away due to the societal harm it causes. An arguable example of this in action is the War On Drugs. This war has been waged for years, and the black market has not only survived, it has thrived in the economy of scarcity that is created and maintained by said war. People and legislators all over the country (the world?) are beginning to see that this war isn't benefiting anyone and have begun legalizing marijuana. Marijuana is one of many drugs, but it's a step in the right direction.
        gknoy 12y ago
        The key with civil disobedience is that you have to be willing to face the penalty. The GP was right that doing so is risky, and one should not engage in civil disobedience without a full grasp of the consequences (and willingness to submit to / fight them legally).
        amagumori 12y ago
        this is a kamikaze approach to reform and requires countless people sacrificing years of their life (or their entire life) to the prison system. for instance if LSD is your drug of choice instead of cannabis, possession is a class B felony with up to $100K in fines and up to 10 years in prison (OR).
      - soperj 12y ago
        That's not what Kim dotcom was doing.
  - happyscrappy 12y ago
    Do other countries with less draconian copyright laws gain an advantage?
    - pbhjpbhj 12y ago
      USA (or the media corps) seems to have Europe in their pocket when it comes to these sorts of laws; mostly once it's pushed through congress [with the aid of many 'campaign donations' I'm sure] then it seems European nations get convinced to harmonise with US practice.
- yeldarb 12y ago
  Out of curiosity, what would happen if a Canadian company were to make a movie based off of a book that has entered the public domain in Canada? Would they just not be able to release it in the US without obtaining a license? Would a US based company be able to do the same if they only released it abroad?
  - tim333 12y ago
    I presume as you suggest the Canadian company couldn't release in the US without a license. Not sure about a US company releasing abroad. The US copyright holder could probably argue they violated their copyright during production if the film was produced in the US. Then again if the filming was done in London but paid for by the US company they would be alright I guess? Popeye may be an interesting case as he's still copyright in the US but not most other places.
  - walterbell 12y ago
    Canada is negotiating with the US via TPP. Some precedent has been set in CETA and NAFTA. Public opinion could influence the outcome of TPP negotiations, as ACTA did. CETA, Canada-EU: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2014/08/canada-shaped-copyright-rules-eu-trade-deal/ http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2014/08/canada-shaped-copyright-r... "Canadian reforms had an impact on the negotiations. Requirements to extend the term of copyright or create new rights for broadcasters and visual artists were removed from the draft text. Moreover, the digital lock rules and Internet service provider liability provisions were substantially re-written to better reflect the Canadian approach ... the “made-in-Canada” approach is gradually garnering increased attention around the world as a creative, viable alternative ... other countries have been considering adopting the Canadian model on issues such as Internet provider liability or the creation of user-generated content." NAFTA, Canada-US-Mexico: http://www.barrysookman.com/2011/02/19/is-copyright-part-of-the-fta-or-nafta/ http://www.barrysookman.com/2011/02/19/is-copyright-part-of-... TPP, Canada-US-Mexico-Australia-New Zealand-Malaysia-Singapore-Japan-Vietnam-Brunei-Peru-Chile : http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2014/10/new-tpp-leak-canada-emerges-leading-opponent-u-s-intellectual-property-demands/ http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2014/10/new-tpp-leak-canada-emerg... "..the U.S. wants Canada to eviscerate many of the recent reforms found in copyright and counterfeiting legislation along with court rulings on patent protection. These demands focus on enhanced criminal liability for copyright infringement, eliminating the Canadian approach to Internet service provider liability, extending the term of copyright protection, and expanding patent protection. Canadian negotiators have thus far resisted many of the proposed changes, offering alternatives that are compatible with current law. Yet as the treaty negotiations continue, the pressure to cave to U.S. pressure will no doubt increase, raising serious concerns about whether the TPP will force the Canadian government to overhaul recently enacted legislation that it has steadfastly defended as reflecting a balanced, “made in Canada” approach."
- anigbrowl 12y ago
  I've often wondered whether Calder vs. Bull (which courts have long interpreted to mean that the Constitutional prohibition of ex post facto laws applies only to 'vital interests' like liberty in criminal cases) isn't subject to an originalist attack. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=3&page=386 http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&...
- Aldo_MX 12y ago
  My expectations are that someday before January 1, 2019 there will be a new law reform to extend copyright another 20 years. Steamboat Willie will never enter the public domain.
  - unreal37 12y ago
    I think that politicians should just admit what they're doing, extend copyright only for Disney Corporation, and leave the rest to enter the public domain.
    - WalterBright 12y ago
      My solution is to allow copyright extensions for those who are willing to pay an annual fee, say $1000. That would likely satisfy most interests, and abandoned works will enter the public domain.
      - unreal37 12y ago
        I totally agree with that too.
      - MereInterest 12y ago
        Except that all works should be able to be built upon. Sherlock Holmes and Bilbo Baggins, Mickey Mouse and The Terminator, Atticus Finch and Charlie Bucket, every one is a cultural idea. It isn't just abandoned works. All cultural works should eventually be available to build upon.
        WalterBright 12y ago
        I agree, but my proposal is one that is much more likely to get through than the all-or-nothing approach.
        unreal37 12y ago
        For the sake of a handful of older profitable works, all works will forever be held back from the public domain. Better that you concede Mickey Mouse and let the rest benefit society as public works.
- k-mcgrady 12y ago
  I didn't actually know about this. I wonder if this didn't happen and copyright had originally just lasted a persons lifetime if people would be less mad about copyright?
- acabal 12y ago
  As I've said before, insanely long copyright terms are one of the biggest modern cultural tragedies we face. If things stay as they are (or get worse), I expect to see an interesting side effect for today's authors: the vast majority of people creating today--those who don't produce blockbuster franchises that ageless corporations can milk eternally--will be totally forgotten in fifty or a hundred year's time. And not forgotten in the "who is that, let me look it up" sense, but rather effectively not included in any meaningful records our children's children would access. Why? Because long copyright prevents volunteers from remembering your work after you're dead. That's not the case for centuries-old authors today. Thanks to the public domain, volunteers from all over the world at places like Project Gutenberg and Archive.org lovingly scan, transcribe, produce, catalog, store, and make available old works for today's generation to enjoy. Not just famous stuff like Dracula, but obscure works, works that were unpopular in their day, works that didn't matter then and maybe don't even matter now. The public domain makes this possible--it keeps the memory of authors alive, because as humans we instinctively know it's important to our culture. But the work you produce today, unless it's highly profitable to a corporation, will be shackled by draconian laws and punishments for hundreds of years. Why should volunteers risk their freedom and treasure to transcribe your 150-year-old work still under copyright? They won't, and you and your work will be forgotten, while we keep re-using and sharing obscure writing from 1923.
  - MereInterest 12y ago
    As one of the saddest plots, look at the below article, showing the lack of availability of books from the middle of the 20th century. http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/03/the-missing-20th-century-how-copyright-protection-makes-books-vanish/255282/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/03/the-mi...
    - pgy 12y ago
      In my boyhood I had been fascinated by science fiction short stories, many of them I found in anthologies published in the middle of the 20th century in America. Being born in a non English-speaking country, I soon run out of reading material for translations were hard to find. When I learned English (and connected to the Internet the first time) I tried to find more from my favourite authors but with little luck. When talking about the disappearance of books, Isaac Asimov's Great SF Stories anthology series[1] always comes to my mind. Around 2006 I spent a whole week searching for it - of the 25 books I managed to find only four or five. Nevertheless, I assembled a pretty big (and pretty illegal) collection of nearly-impossible-to-find sci-fi stories during my days in high school, but lost it when my computer went wrong a few years later. (I am sure I could have recovered them somehow, but back then I had no idea.) Last year I tried to reassemble my collection but I gave up, it would have been too much work. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Isaac_Asimov%27s_Great_SF_Stories_anthology_series https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Isaac_Asimov%27s_Grea...
- smsm42 12y ago
  Or, rather, would enter the public domain, if only Congress were not to enact the next Mickey Mouse protection law. Look at this and weep: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Copyright_term.svg/450px-Copyright_term.svg.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Co...
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > The next time anything will enter the public domain in the US is January 1, 2019. Right, because Congress surely won't extend terms again before that.
- MaysonL 12y ago
  Where is the copyright Uber who will republish some of these works, and take the arguably unconstitutional copyright extensions to court?
  - twoodfin 12y ago
    It's been to the Supreme Court in Eldred v. Ashcroft[1] and found constitutional, 7-2. They're right, IMHO. Congress gets to set the terms of copyright, and it's "limited" so long as any particular Congress can allow it to expire at their pleasure. Don't like it? Elect a different Congress. [1] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldred_v._Ashcroft http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldred_v._Ashcroft
- NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago
  The courts are no better... they've yanked works out of the public domain and back into copyright captivity.
- merrua 12y ago
  Frighteningly book sellers are also trashing a lot of books they are unable to sell at a profit. So when the laws change the books may not exist to be maintained.
angelbob 12y ago
I read the title and expected more tweaking of the US for how many years it's been since any writers' work has entered the public domain here.
jdeisenberg 12y ago
Well, there goes their incentive to produce any new works.
- mmanfrin 12y ago
  Honestly why doesn't congress do something to encourage them to write more? They've obviously not written anything lately because there's no incentive!
herge 12y ago
So James Bond is in the public domain in Canada?
- soperj 12y ago
  So is a bunch of Hemingway.
  - pgrote 12y ago
    I found three titles on the Canadian Project Gutenberg site. Are there more titles? http://www.gutenberg.ca/#catalogueH http://www.gutenberg.ca/#catalogueH
    - soperj 12y ago
      I guess my memory over-estimated the amount of Hemingway. Should have been "so is some Hemingway"!
- Marcus316 12y ago
  So, yes, it seems that James Bond has entered the public domain in Canada. I wonder, though, what kind of legal hammers would be brought down upon someone who tried to do any sort of adaptation or reproduction of the work in another medium. Could an animated adaptation of the novels (or even just an illustrated version) be made, and if so, what limitations would be in place (or what legal ramifications would need to be considered) given that in the US this material is NOT in the public domain, and would at least require licensing (I assume) to be distributed in the US? It's Public Domain, but not really? :P (I'm from Canada, and I'd love to explore using some of these works creatively, but it's tough to unravel what is and isn't kosher).
  - hrktb 12y ago
    The name "James Bond" would still be trademarked, so I'm not sure there would be anything freely allowed from a commercial point of view.
wazoox 12y ago
About Saint-Exupery: his plane and chain bracelet have been found in 2004 in La Ciotat bay, so there is no serious doubt anymore about the exact date and place of his death.
- crousto 12y ago
  Also, for France, Saint-Exupery's body of work will only enter the public domain in 2032. This is the result of a law that extends copyright in the special case when an author dies for their country.
anigbrowl 12y ago
Somewhat off-topic, but: Piet Mondrian - A Dutch painter whose distinctive grid based creations – horizontal and vertical lines upon a white background adorned with red, blue and yellow blocks – proved one of the most influential experiments with abstraction of the 20th century. I always thought of Mondrian's work as abstract until the first time I flew to the Netherlands. Dutch people really, really like flowers, and have made them a major agricultural export. Also, a lot of dutch land is reclaimed from the sea and the terrain is pretty flat to begin with. Fly into Schipol at the right time of year and Mondrian's inspiration becomes very obvious - black roads, snow-covered open fields, greenhouses with blocks of vivid color. In a flash, my concept of his work went from 'paintings' to 'pictures'.
- amathstudent 12y ago
  Thank you!
MereInterest 12y ago
In addition to this, I like considering things that should be entering the public domain. Using the initial copyright length of 14 years, renewable for an additional 14, anything published in 1987 should be entering the public domain in the upcoming year. * Predator * Robocop * The Princess Bride * Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency, by Douglas Adams * Watchmen, by Alan Moore * Hatchet, by Gary Paulsen These should all be open cultural works, ready for new writers to use as a basis. Ready to be used as the backdrop for new stories. Instead, they are locked universes, only containing a small number of stories.
- andrewljohnson 12y ago
  28 years isn't even long enough for the author to die. As a creator, I want to maintain my copyrights at least as long as I live. I say go make your own backdrops, your own universe.
  - MereInterest 12y ago
    28 years is long enough for a child to be raised on newly published works, then grow up to make their own stories. The child who play-pretends as Sherlock Holmes or as The Dread Pirate Robert should be able to grow up and write those stories.
    - andrewljohnson 12y ago
      How do we know that is even beneficial? Why can't the child create her own characters? It's a warm and fuzzy statement you make, but what's the argument about why this is good, for child or society?
      - MereInterest 12y ago
        http://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2007/07/research-optimal-copyright-term-is-14-years/ http://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2007/07/research-optima... The purpose of copyright is explicitly stated to be "to promote the sciences and useful arts". Copyright's temporary monopoly over works is designed to compensate the author for having written them. Without public domain, there is no advancement, as future authors cannot build upon earlier works. If I ever reference the sword Excalibur, or the outlaw Robin Hood, or the raising of Lazarus, I am using cultural references. Under the reign of permanent copyright, these references, which can enrich a work considerably, would not be allowed. In 100 years, authors will not be allowed to make reference to Harry Potter, or Frodo, or Luke Skywalker, a great cultural loss.
mgraczyk 12y ago
Interesting list, but sad that the US is once again missing. Side note: the page is mostly unreadable in Chrome on my Nexus 5. The text runs past the edge of my screen and I can't zoom out.
juliendorra 12y ago
Every December since the last 3 years we (SavoirsCom1, a collective advocating for cultural commons) publish a Public Domain Advent Calendar. It's a fun way to anticipate and discover the works of the authors joining the public domain: http://www.aventdudomainepublic.org/ http://www.aventdudomainepublic.org/ (In French! But with names, links and pictures it should be useful and interesting to all)
ww520 12y ago
When is Micky Mouse entering public domain? It has been for a long while.
- pervycreeper 12y ago
  Never.
swsieber 12y ago
The question is why don't we organize a campaign and get a bill introduced to shorten copyright law? Every year we lament how we should have more in the public domain without doing anything. I'm fairly sure somebody could come up with a catchy slogan or some cool perspective that would make voters hate their senator if they didn't pass that type of bill (copyright shortenting) Conceivably (and most likely), it might not pass on the first time. But basically all I hear here is whining, without any suggestions on how to fix it - possible laws yes, possible action plans no. We need a couple of good opinion pieces on why copyright is bad, and maybe a couple of light-weight buzzfeed style articles that highlight what things we're missing out (so they can trend on facebook). You wouldn't believe #4...

259 points by benbreen 12y ago

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

The French historian Marc Bloch is one of the ones who makes their runner's up list and deserves wider attention. He was shot by the Gestapo in 1944 and along with Fernand Braudel (who was himself a POW at the time) was the leader of the Annales School, arguably the most influential school of thought among professional historians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Bloch http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Bloch

audiodude 12y ago

In case anyone is wondering, once again nothing will enter the public domain in the United States because of Congress' perpetual habit of retroactively extending copyright on works. The next time anything will enter the public domain in the US is January 1, 2019. source: https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday

IndianAstronaut 12y ago
This is absurd and puts a huge damper on creative work.
- mathattack 12y ago
  It seems like the work where a dedicated minority (who stand to collect royalties) pushes against an issue that mildly benefits the majority. Taxi medallions were a similar phenomenon pre-Lyft and pre-Uber.
  - aikah 12y ago
    try "disrupting" copyright,be ready for a swat team raiding your house. http://mashable.com/2012/08/08/kim-dotcom-raid/ http://mashable.com/2012/08/08/kim-dotcom-raid/ > Taxi medallions were a similar phenomenon pre-Lyft and pre-Uber. Neither Uber nor Lyft put an end to Taxi medallion system.
    - click170 12y ago
      I'm not sure if you're joking or not, but civil disobedience is a valid and legitimate form of protest. If you disagree with a law, ignore it. If enough people do the same, the burden from enforcing the law becomes too much and it simply stops being enforced or is legislated away due to the societal harm it causes. An arguable example of this in action is the War On Drugs. This war has been waged for years, and the black market has not only survived, it has thrived in the economy of scarcity that is created and maintained by said war. People and legislators all over the country (the world?) are beginning to see that this war isn't benefiting anyone and have begun legalizing marijuana. Marijuana is one of many drugs, but it's a step in the right direction.
      - gknoy 12y ago
        The key with civil disobedience is that you have to be willing to face the penalty. The GP was right that doing so is risky, and one should not engage in civil disobedience without a full grasp of the consequences (and willingness to submit to / fight them legally).
      - amagumori 12y ago
        this is a kamikaze approach to reform and requires countless people sacrificing years of their life (or their entire life) to the prison system. for instance if LSD is your drug of choice instead of cannabis, possession is a class B felony with up to $100K in fines and up to 10 years in prison (OR).
    - soperj 12y ago
      That's not what Kim dotcom was doing.
- happyscrappy 12y ago
  Do other countries with less draconian copyright laws gain an advantage?
  - pbhjpbhj 12y ago
    USA (or the media corps) seems to have Europe in their pocket when it comes to these sorts of laws; mostly once it's pushed through congress [with the aid of many 'campaign donations' I'm sure] then it seems European nations get convinced to harmonise with US practice.
yeldarb 12y ago
Out of curiosity, what would happen if a Canadian company were to make a movie based off of a book that has entered the public domain in Canada? Would they just not be able to release it in the US without obtaining a license? Would a US based company be able to do the same if they only released it abroad?
- tim333 12y ago
  I presume as you suggest the Canadian company couldn't release in the US without a license. Not sure about a US company releasing abroad. The US copyright holder could probably argue they violated their copyright during production if the film was produced in the US. Then again if the filming was done in London but paid for by the US company they would be alright I guess? Popeye may be an interesting case as he's still copyright in the US but not most other places.
- walterbell 12y ago
  Canada is negotiating with the US via TPP. Some precedent has been set in CETA and NAFTA. Public opinion could influence the outcome of TPP negotiations, as ACTA did. CETA, Canada-EU: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2014/08/canada-shaped-copyright-rules-eu-trade-deal/ http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2014/08/canada-shaped-copyright-r... "Canadian reforms had an impact on the negotiations. Requirements to extend the term of copyright or create new rights for broadcasters and visual artists were removed from the draft text. Moreover, the digital lock rules and Internet service provider liability provisions were substantially re-written to better reflect the Canadian approach ... the “made-in-Canada” approach is gradually garnering increased attention around the world as a creative, viable alternative ... other countries have been considering adopting the Canadian model on issues such as Internet provider liability or the creation of user-generated content." NAFTA, Canada-US-Mexico: http://www.barrysookman.com/2011/02/19/is-copyright-part-of-the-fta-or-nafta/ http://www.barrysookman.com/2011/02/19/is-copyright-part-of-... TPP, Canada-US-Mexico-Australia-New Zealand-Malaysia-Singapore-Japan-Vietnam-Brunei-Peru-Chile : http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2014/10/new-tpp-leak-canada-emerges-leading-opponent-u-s-intellectual-property-demands/ http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2014/10/new-tpp-leak-canada-emerg... "..the U.S. wants Canada to eviscerate many of the recent reforms found in copyright and counterfeiting legislation along with court rulings on patent protection. These demands focus on enhanced criminal liability for copyright infringement, eliminating the Canadian approach to Internet service provider liability, extending the term of copyright protection, and expanding patent protection. Canadian negotiators have thus far resisted many of the proposed changes, offering alternatives that are compatible with current law. Yet as the treaty negotiations continue, the pressure to cave to U.S. pressure will no doubt increase, raising serious concerns about whether the TPP will force the Canadian government to overhaul recently enacted legislation that it has steadfastly defended as reflecting a balanced, “made in Canada” approach."
anigbrowl 12y ago
I've often wondered whether Calder vs. Bull (which courts have long interpreted to mean that the Constitutional prohibition of ex post facto laws applies only to 'vital interests' like liberty in criminal cases) isn't subject to an originalist attack. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=3&page=386 http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&...
Aldo_MX 12y ago
My expectations are that someday before January 1, 2019 there will be a new law reform to extend copyright another 20 years. Steamboat Willie will never enter the public domain.
- unreal37 12y ago
  I think that politicians should just admit what they're doing, extend copyright only for Disney Corporation, and leave the rest to enter the public domain.
  - WalterBright 12y ago
    My solution is to allow copyright extensions for those who are willing to pay an annual fee, say $1000. That would likely satisfy most interests, and abandoned works will enter the public domain.
    - unreal37 12y ago
      I totally agree with that too.
    - MereInterest 12y ago
      Except that all works should be able to be built upon. Sherlock Holmes and Bilbo Baggins, Mickey Mouse and The Terminator, Atticus Finch and Charlie Bucket, every one is a cultural idea. It isn't just abandoned works. All cultural works should eventually be available to build upon.
      - WalterBright 12y ago
        I agree, but my proposal is one that is much more likely to get through than the all-or-nothing approach.
      - unreal37 12y ago
        For the sake of a handful of older profitable works, all works will forever be held back from the public domain. Better that you concede Mickey Mouse and let the rest benefit society as public works.
k-mcgrady 12y ago
I didn't actually know about this. I wonder if this didn't happen and copyright had originally just lasted a persons lifetime if people would be less mad about copyright?
acabal 12y ago
As I've said before, insanely long copyright terms are one of the biggest modern cultural tragedies we face. If things stay as they are (or get worse), I expect to see an interesting side effect for today's authors: the vast majority of people creating today--those who don't produce blockbuster franchises that ageless corporations can milk eternally--will be totally forgotten in fifty or a hundred year's time. And not forgotten in the "who is that, let me look it up" sense, but rather effectively not included in any meaningful records our children's children would access. Why? Because long copyright prevents volunteers from remembering your work after you're dead. That's not the case for centuries-old authors today. Thanks to the public domain, volunteers from all over the world at places like Project Gutenberg and Archive.org lovingly scan, transcribe, produce, catalog, store, and make available old works for today's generation to enjoy. Not just famous stuff like Dracula, but obscure works, works that were unpopular in their day, works that didn't matter then and maybe don't even matter now. The public domain makes this possible--it keeps the memory of authors alive, because as humans we instinctively know it's important to our culture. But the work you produce today, unless it's highly profitable to a corporation, will be shackled by draconian laws and punishments for hundreds of years. Why should volunteers risk their freedom and treasure to transcribe your 150-year-old work still under copyright? They won't, and you and your work will be forgotten, while we keep re-using and sharing obscure writing from 1923.
- MereInterest 12y ago
  As one of the saddest plots, look at the below article, showing the lack of availability of books from the middle of the 20th century. http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/03/the-missing-20th-century-how-copyright-protection-makes-books-vanish/255282/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/03/the-mi...
  - pgy 12y ago
    In my boyhood I had been fascinated by science fiction short stories, many of them I found in anthologies published in the middle of the 20th century in America. Being born in a non English-speaking country, I soon run out of reading material for translations were hard to find. When I learned English (and connected to the Internet the first time) I tried to find more from my favourite authors but with little luck. When talking about the disappearance of books, Isaac Asimov's Great SF Stories anthology series[1] always comes to my mind. Around 2006 I spent a whole week searching for it - of the 25 books I managed to find only four or five. Nevertheless, I assembled a pretty big (and pretty illegal) collection of nearly-impossible-to-find sci-fi stories during my days in high school, but lost it when my computer went wrong a few years later. (I am sure I could have recovered them somehow, but back then I had no idea.) Last year I tried to reassemble my collection but I gave up, it would have been too much work. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Isaac_Asimov%27s_Great_SF_Stories_anthology_series https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Isaac_Asimov%27s_Grea...
smsm42 12y ago
Or, rather, would enter the public domain, if only Congress were not to enact the next Mickey Mouse protection law. Look at this and weep: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Copyright_term.svg/450px-Copyright_term.svg.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Co...
dragonwriter 12y ago
> The next time anything will enter the public domain in the US is January 1, 2019. Right, because Congress surely won't extend terms again before that.
MaysonL 12y ago
Where is the copyright Uber who will republish some of these works, and take the arguably unconstitutional copyright extensions to court?
- twoodfin 12y ago
  It's been to the Supreme Court in Eldred v. Ashcroft[1] and found constitutional, 7-2. They're right, IMHO. Congress gets to set the terms of copyright, and it's "limited" so long as any particular Congress can allow it to expire at their pleasure. Don't like it? Elect a different Congress. [1] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldred_v._Ashcroft http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldred_v._Ashcroft
NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago
The courts are no better... they've yanked works out of the public domain and back into copyright captivity.
merrua 12y ago
Frighteningly book sellers are also trashing a lot of books they are unable to sell at a profit. So when the laws change the books may not exist to be maintained.

angelbob 12y ago

I read the title and expected more tweaking of the US for how many years it's been since any writers' work has entered the public domain here.

jdeisenberg 12y ago

Well, there goes their incentive to produce any new works.

mmanfrin 12y ago
Honestly why doesn't congress do something to encourage them to write more? They've obviously not written anything lately because there's no incentive!

herge 12y ago

So James Bond is in the public domain in Canada?

soperj 12y ago
So is a bunch of Hemingway.
- pgrote 12y ago
  I found three titles on the Canadian Project Gutenberg site. Are there more titles? http://www.gutenberg.ca/#catalogueH http://www.gutenberg.ca/#catalogueH
  - soperj 12y ago
    I guess my memory over-estimated the amount of Hemingway. Should have been "so is some Hemingway"!
Marcus316 12y ago
So, yes, it seems that James Bond has entered the public domain in Canada. I wonder, though, what kind of legal hammers would be brought down upon someone who tried to do any sort of adaptation or reproduction of the work in another medium. Could an animated adaptation of the novels (or even just an illustrated version) be made, and if so, what limitations would be in place (or what legal ramifications would need to be considered) given that in the US this material is NOT in the public domain, and would at least require licensing (I assume) to be distributed in the US? It's Public Domain, but not really? :P (I'm from Canada, and I'd love to explore using some of these works creatively, but it's tough to unravel what is and isn't kosher).
- hrktb 12y ago
  The name "James Bond" would still be trademarked, so I'm not sure there would be anything freely allowed from a commercial point of view.

wazoox 12y ago

About Saint-Exupery: his plane and chain bracelet have been found in 2004 in La Ciotat bay, so there is no serious doubt anymore about the exact date and place of his death.

crousto 12y ago
Also, for France, Saint-Exupery's body of work will only enter the public domain in 2032. This is the result of a law that extends copyright in the special case when an author dies for their country.

anigbrowl 12y ago

Somewhat off-topic, but: Piet Mondrian - A Dutch painter whose distinctive grid based creations – horizontal and vertical lines upon a white background adorned with red, blue and yellow blocks – proved one of the most influential experiments with abstraction of the 20th century. I always thought of Mondrian's work as abstract until the first time I flew to the Netherlands. Dutch people really, really like flowers, and have made them a major agricultural export. Also, a lot of dutch land is reclaimed from the sea and the terrain is pretty flat to begin with. Fly into Schipol at the right time of year and Mondrian's inspiration becomes very obvious - black roads, snow-covered open fields, greenhouses with blocks of vivid color. In a flash, my concept of his work went from 'paintings' to 'pictures'.

amathstudent 12y ago
Thank you!

MereInterest 12y ago

In addition to this, I like considering things that should be entering the public domain. Using the initial copyright length of 14 years, renewable for an additional 14, anything published in 1987 should be entering the public domain in the upcoming year. * Predator * Robocop * The Princess Bride * Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency, by Douglas Adams * Watchmen, by Alan Moore * Hatchet, by Gary Paulsen These should all be open cultural works, ready for new writers to use as a basis. Ready to be used as the backdrop for new stories. Instead, they are locked universes, only containing a small number of stories.

andrewljohnson 12y ago
28 years isn't even long enough for the author to die. As a creator, I want to maintain my copyrights at least as long as I live. I say go make your own backdrops, your own universe.
- MereInterest 12y ago
  28 years is long enough for a child to be raised on newly published works, then grow up to make their own stories. The child who play-pretends as Sherlock Holmes or as The Dread Pirate Robert should be able to grow up and write those stories.
  - andrewljohnson 12y ago
    How do we know that is even beneficial? Why can't the child create her own characters? It's a warm and fuzzy statement you make, but what's the argument about why this is good, for child or society?
    - MereInterest 12y ago
      http://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2007/07/research-optimal-copyright-term-is-14-years/ http://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2007/07/research-optima... The purpose of copyright is explicitly stated to be "to promote the sciences and useful arts". Copyright's temporary monopoly over works is designed to compensate the author for having written them. Without public domain, there is no advancement, as future authors cannot build upon earlier works. If I ever reference the sword Excalibur, or the outlaw Robin Hood, or the raising of Lazarus, I am using cultural references. Under the reign of permanent copyright, these references, which can enrich a work considerably, would not be allowed. In 100 years, authors will not be allowed to make reference to Harry Potter, or Frodo, or Luke Skywalker, a great cultural loss.

mgraczyk 12y ago

Interesting list, but sad that the US is once again missing. Side note: the page is mostly unreadable in Chrome on my Nexus 5. The text runs past the edge of my screen and I can't zoom out.

juliendorra 12y ago

Every December since the last 3 years we (SavoirsCom1, a collective advocating for cultural commons) publish a Public Domain Advent Calendar. It's a fun way to anticipate and discover the works of the authors joining the public domain: http://www.aventdudomainepublic.org/ http://www.aventdudomainepublic.org/ (In French! But with names, links and pictures it should be useful and interesting to all)

ww520 12y ago

When is Micky Mouse entering public domain? It has been for a long while.

pervycreeper 12y ago
Never.

swsieber 12y ago

The question is why don't we organize a campaign and get a bill introduced to shorten copyright law? Every year we lament how we should have more in the public domain without doing anything. I'm fairly sure somebody could come up with a catchy slogan or some cool perspective that would make voters hate their senator if they didn't pass that type of bill (copyright shortenting) Conceivably (and most likely), it might not pass on the first time. But basically all I hear here is whining, without any suggestions on how to fix it - possible laws yes, possible action plans no. We need a couple of good opinion pieces on why copyright is bad, and maybe a couple of light-weight buzzfeed style articles that highlight what things we're missing out (so they can trend on facebook). You wouldn't believe #4...