4 ms·
Do you think that Disney is the only company who should be able to tell stories involving Mickey Mouse?
by dantheman 12y ago
Do you think that Disney is the only company who should be able to tell stories involving Mickey Mouse?
- transfire 12y agoUntil Disney goes out of business, I think that is just, yes.
- JoshTriplett 12y agoAnd yet many of Disney's most successful movies retell much older stories, only possible because those stories went into the public domain. Bit of hypocrisy there.
- mjevans 12y agoThose characters and stories were not (substantially) created by Disney though. Everyone else /should/ be able to make those same stories in similar media. Disney /really/ needs to be more proactive about using their brand name's trademark within advertising as the consumer protection measure as that is the intended to function of trademarks. That, BTW, is what is stopping others from making a Disney(tm)'s Mickey Mouse(tm) in steamboat willy(c, expired); and not stopping others from making a more generic 'mouse piloting a steam boat' movie.
- deciplex 12y agoWhether it is 'just' or not, however you're defining that, it does not align with the way human culture works, and degrades cultural innovation resulting in fewer works of poorer quality. If cultural progress is one of the things you want to optimize for in copyright law, then this is bad policy.
- logfromblammo 12y agoYou are confusing trademarks and copyrights. As an iconic trademarked character, Disney is the only company able to produce new entertainment or durable consumer products featuring Mickey Mouse. By use of copyrights, Disney can also prevent the legitimate purchaser of a 1928 film reel from turning it into a digital video file. The difference can be seen more clearly in the character of Peter Pan. The copyright on the original publications have expired in most of the world. But GOS Hospital and Disney can still claim trademark over some elements, inasmuch as they continue to be used in their business. You can write a new novel or play about Peter Pan, but woe to you if you make a new animated film, or use it to promote your children's hospital, or even try to use it to sell peanut butter. Trademarks do not expire, as long as they are defended. But trademarks are more narrowly defined, and restricted to a particular purpose.
- dantheman 12y agoI'm not confusing the two, I'm discussing derivative works which clearly fall under the copyright regime. Trademarks have to do with fraud, i.e. im trying to pass myself off as disney to sell you something. It's completely different.