#ooc

Lancelot is French.

Yeah? But still part of the legend, right?

I mean, the Brits interacted with the French....

Brekke, I would agree while the artist is alive, and for a short time after yes, but do you really think the material should be off limits for 75 years after an artist died? It's not like he's taking it with him/her

The depth and complexity of the Matter of Britain is because of "fan fiction" - of many authors taking "public" characters and adding to the canon.

I get what you're saying about the Happy Birthday thing. I don't think the original composer had intended that to be a profit-making property.

And corporations? Why would it be nearly a full century to shield a corporations Copyright when that's not even the artist but raather a patron of the real artist?

Yes. Public characters for whom nobody knows the original authors.

But that's what I'm saying - after the creator's death, who benefits from onerous copyright protection?

The public domain is important.

It is ironic that Disney has so benefitted from public domain.

Hm. I think 100 years is reasonable. I think that once the property is owned by a corporation, the corporation becomes the "author" for all intents and purposes (I'm not a fan of that, but if people are making a living off of those properties, then how is it fair to suddenly rip that living away from them by undermining it with the properties going public domain?).

See, that's what trademark is for.

Mickey goes into public domain, Disney does not "lose" him.

What would that look like in practice?

That's a good question. Worth finding out.

Well with Trademarks still in effect?

What it sounds like to me is that suddenly EVERYBODY is making Mickey stuff, and that undermines the corporation.

But I think most people are savvy enough to distinguish between LowRent Animation's DVD and Disney's.

Disney would still be well protected as THEIR Mickey, but Steamboat version could be tried in various ways without suing some college kid into the ground just because he had a new take

I don't see why college kid can't make a new character, though.

I just don't get that part.

Why tell new King Arthur stories, or new Cinderellas?

Why must it be the same character?

Sometimes it isn't and they still get sued becuse it's too much alike

Also true.

Why Sherlock Holmes?

Equating Mickey-the-character with narratives born of ancient stories doesn't work as a starter for me.

Sherlock Holmes ain't ancient.

Mickey is not, to me, a particularly interesting character. I find him a cypher.

BUT

Disney's stranglehold on IP laws BECAUSE of Mickey?

Heck, how many people have Batman stories?

But...Mickey doesn't have IP restraint on properties that Disney purchased from other sources. How much of Disney's stuff is from pre-existing sources? You can't tell me that all interpretations of Holmes are hung up in Disney.

No

Rahne

Disney, to protect Mickey, lobbied heavily to block public domain release for EVERYTHING

Mm, well, okay. Yes, that's excessive, Cat...BUT... they did not succeed, and I have no problem with Disney retaining the right to that which is entirely theirs.

They did succeed. The Sonny Bono Act was their win.

That is why nothing has been released into public domain for 20 years.

Let's say that Sherlock Holmes was under the same rules thne that it was today. You could not make a work based on it (Even the Great Mouse Detective) until 2005. Disney took advantage of the fact they had the freedom to create with that work.

Then denied it to others

well denied OTHER works to others

They couldn't copyright Cinderella (the fairy tale) but they could copyright their movie of the same name... which makes me wonder about Tangled, actually. Hm. I wonder how/if copyright effected that name choice, or if it was -entirely- about appealing to boys as well as girls....

Mmph, this is what I didn't know. Okay. I still think copyright protections are hugely important, though.

See, I don't mind that they copyrighted their own Cinderella. That didn't block a LOT of different interpretations from happening, too.

At one time, Brekke, the Copyright was 14 years AFTER the Creator's death.

Meaning enough time for the creator, and the kids to gain benefits