The following notable /co/ media from 1929 will enter the public domain in the USA at midnight on January 1st:>Thimble Theatre's 1929 comics, which includes Popeye >The first five Silly Symphony shorts, most notably Skeleton Dance>The Adventures of Tintin in the Le Petit Vingtième and most of Tintin in the Land of the Soviets>A dozen 1929 Mickey Mouse theatrical shorts, including the first with Mickey's voice and with glovesThe character designs as they appeared in these comics are public domain as well, but only the elements that appeared in this media when published and ones that don't infringe on trademarks
Has there been a single piece of non-Disney Mickey Mouse media that isn't a cheap horror cash-in?
>>146955804Yes, the amount of fanwork and animations and porn and anything else made by fans over the decades is astronomical, people were just making them the whole time anyway so it just isn't a full-length cheap horror film released immediately after he reaches public domain by grifters
>>146955735Skeleton Dance was not already? Ceazy.
>>146955804I guess shitty "horror" stuff is just easier to do and we should see more interesting stuff as time goes on, hopefully
Shipping Popeye with Tintin now
>>146956786I think Popeye and Captain Haddock would get along pretty well. At the very least, they could trade colorful insults and exclamations.
>>146955735>The Adventures of Tintin in the Le Petit Vingtième and most of Tintin in the Land of the SovietsOnly in the US. In Europe, Serge's family wants to make as much money on Tintin. Fanarts aren't even allowed
>>146955735Oh, I can't wait, I'm about to bust.
>>146955735Here's some good news for anyone who is making a Popeye story. You can show Popeye's strength and power boosts coming from spinach! The original depiction or reference to spinach has been in the public domain.
>>146955804There's been a couple comic and game attempts so far, but it'll take time
>>146957543Says here that spinach was 1931, so 2027https://www.firstversions.com/2015/06/popeye-comics.html
Doesn’t OG Superman hit public domain soonish?
>>146957773Yes, that's true! However, here's the loophole: The specific comic strip where Popeye's power is first linked to spinach hasn’t had its copyright renewed. A copyright expert conducted an extensive search for any legal documents proving its copyright status and found nothing (Not surprising, considering King Features has a history of being sloppy with Popeye's copyright) Since that strip explicitly establishes Popeye's power coming from spinach—and it’s the first time this connection appears—we can use that interpretation of Popeye.https://mashable.com/article/public-domain-day-2025
>>1469578122034 so in 10 years which is a ways away.
>>146957895So that's why the upcoming slasher Popeye movies use spinach
Is it me or in some cartoons popeye would randomly say skibidi in his ad libs?
>>146957968Seeing as the article and discovery were published only three days ago, there's a 100% the writer and director did not know that. Similarly, just as many people gave Winnie the Pooh a red shirt without fully understanding that that's Disney's version of the character.
>>146957300Is there any fanfare for Buck Rogers?
Copyright Day this, Copyright Day that.When will be the next Weasel Stomping day?
>>146955804Horror is cheaper to produce.
>>146955735You forgot to mention some Tarzan comic strips are also going to become public domain.
>>146955735Only the creatively bankrupt give a fuck.
>>146955804There is that issue of Savage Dragon where Mickey Mouse tries to rape an Asian chick.
>>146957300Since when was Plastic Man public domain?
>>146957300Who is that below Mickey Mouse?
>>146958343Plastic Man was originally created by Police Comics. After the company went out of business, DC acquired the rights to all the characters they had created. However, DC failed to renew the copyright for any of Plastic Man's comic issues #1–102, making him public domain. The same thing happened with The Question, Captain Marvel (Shazam), the Blue Beetle (Daniel Garret), and Uncle Sam and the freedom fighter members.>>146958404Krazy Kat
>>146958102The first Red Shirt Pooh was a board game in 1932. The guys who licensed the character out for that ended up working out a deal for Disney.
>>146955804There's this.
Enjoy it while it lasts, 2025 is the year Disney drops all pretense and just buys the world.
>>146955735>>146957300We need to create a chart for /co/ of things in public domain.
>>146958654They don't have the money for that anymore. They effectively put everything they had into buying Fox only for their movies to start eating shit and the theme park price gouging finally getting to a point where attendance is actually starting to dip.
I'm going to do terrible things with Tintin. Like making him a headline chasing alcoholic.>>146957300Zorro wasn't already public domain? Crazy.
>>146956864I find it funny how we got Tintin before Europe did, just like they got Popeye before we did.>>146958798No Zoro has been in PD for a while, the characters on the staircase are the ones that are entering.
>>146957300Minnie should be added
>>146958796Well, that just means they'll be doing it the hard way.
>>146958305So you, then
>>146958610What is it?
>>146958654>They'll never put stuff in the public domain again, Disney will fight for another extension>Things are going into the public domain again, but Disney will find a way to prevent Pooh going public domain>Pooh may be public domain but Mickey won't be, Disney will prevent it>Mickey is public domain but Disney will totally buy everything in 2025
>>146959302It's a comic book.
>>146955735'Hol up there, OP. That was back when copyright terms were 28 years plus one 28 year extension. Many of those could well have been PD for decades by now.
>>146955735Wow! ...It's amazing that I don't care.
>>146959826>My Mexican ass doesn't care unless it's an underage "waifu" threadWe know
>>146959846What? I meant, I don't care about the public domain at all.
>>146959677the ones mentioned in OP had their copyright active when the laws changed, so they ARE only now getting into the public domain
>>146957543The Sea Hag is also in the Public Domain kinda.
>>146955804Expensive stuff is harder to get backing for. Cheap-as-chips horror-cash-ins that easily make their money back are easy to get backing for.
>>146958654I know people meme how Disney is going to come in and swoop in and stop public domain for another 20 years to own the horror makers, but they won't. The content is largely worthless to them, and more importantly they finally realized what we said overall when they still get to keep control of Mickey, Donald, and their important OCs by just extending trademarks forever. With that out of the way they don't need to care about the media themselves if they can still say they have ownership of Mickey Mouse Now the real test will be Snow White. They can't trademark a single aspect of that film besides maybe the dwarves names, and they can't retain any control of that film or its characters. If they let it go with no fight they are never putting up a fight again
>>146957300>OG Captain MarvelFuck yeah.
>>146955804He's one of the playable characters in "Inverse Ninjas VS. The Public Domain", a multi-player top-down shooter that's still in early access.
>>146959826If that were true you wouldn't have responded twice in the thread
>>146955804It's been 1 year. we might not get anything worthwhile for decades. but the point is now people can try.
>>146959874If something from 1929 was not renewed it has been PD since the late '50s. Who knows how much stuff was never renewed for another 28 years?
>>146961003Yes, a lot of things have been PD and just gotten forgotten, it's part of the problem with copyright being so long now
>>146961003you had to physically go down to the Copyright Office in Washington D.C. and file for a renewal back then as well so unless it was a really valuable property nobody was going to bother with that shit. you will remember that Universal's attempt at sueing Nintendo over Donkey Kong fell apart because the King Kong movie had become PD in 1961 from not being renewed.
>>146960966>but the point is now people can try.Let’s not forget the additional benefits that come with Mickey entering the public domain. With his early cartoons now public domain, they’ll be more accessible—even the ones Disney tries to keep buried. It also means we can create derivative works that go beyond simple redraws. Now, we can restore his cartoons without worrying about Disney or paying royalties. Many of his shorts are still stuck on DVD with no plans for proper 1080p rescans for Blu-ray. Now we can do it ourselves, especially with the more "problematic" ones Disney has avoided—allowing us to preserve and showcase the best versions of his shorts. Public domain isn’t just about reusing well-known characters in new stories; it’s also about preserving and revitalizing historical works for future generations.
>>146961051It wasn't the movie, it was the book, which was published before the movie got releasedThe other thing was Universal used that reasoning (that Kong was in the public domain because of the book) to win a case against them over their own King Kong movie years before the Nintendo case
>>146961276[i Can't remember if it was Kineko or not]In practice though this can be quite a fuckin' hassleWhen there was a Steamboat Willie scan earlier this year it was sourced from an 1978 library print. The bureaucracy meant that most prints before that fell into the rot. I don't think the other cartoons were so lucky
>>146961469Looking at what companies like Thunderbean have accomplished, they’re like the Indiana Jones of tracking down and restoring high-quality prints. We have that Barney Bear cartoon that was lost for years. Not to mention their incredible work on the Flip the Frog and Van Beuren Tom and Jerry Blu-ray sets. If anyone can uncover and restore quality Mickey Mouse prints, it’s them.
>>146961051Hmm, that's probably why we have so many Golden Age Cartoons in the Public Domain.
>>146959882Bluto won’t be available for use until 2028 (four more years), but you can use Brutus. His first appearance in Barbecue for Two is in the public domain since its copyright wasn’t renewed. However, you can’t depict him with a white sailor hat and yellow shirt—as that specific look is still under copyright.
There's nothing cool to be done with any of this shit. The absolute peak scenario is Public Domain Kingdom Hearts but no westerner has just the right autism that Nomura has, let alone someone whose has that superpower + wants to use it on stuff within the public domain. So all you'll get is cameos is vidya and budget horror movies.
>>146961991No need to be pessimistic anon, all it takes is one person to make magic. To make something that is truly inspired.
>>146955804The media itself, which is the point.
I wonder if the Sonny Bono Act was just an overreaction or people were really gearing up to make Micky Mouse material in the early 2000s. And Disney wisely moved it far enough ahead that interest fell apart.
>>146955735First Appearance Betty Boop will be public domain in 2026
>>146956848Captain Haddock first appeared in Crab with the Golden Claws, he doesn't become public domain until 2036.
>>146962134Cool.
>>146958556>Police Comicskinda off-topic but I find it fascinating that there's a Detective Comics and Police Comics, but both of them seemed to feature superheroes instead of actual cops. Why was this?
>>146962134Bimbo will also be available that year as well.
>>146963356Detective Comics started out as an anthology comic with some about detectives (like Slam Bradley), before Superman made his debut. Even before Batman debuted they were starting to go down the pulp masked detective route, with the Crimson Avenger.Police Comics was launched after Superman had already made his debut so they probably tried to do superheroes because of that. Plastic Man was a superhero who worked closely with the police and later FBI probably to keep that Police theme going. But in the first issue there was more theme of crime/imprisonment--711 and Steele Kerrigan's backstory dealt with wrongful imprisonment, The Mouthpiece is a district attorney who decided to fight crime by masking upAfter 102 issues they removed Plastic Man and others from Police Comics in favor of crime comics which were starting to get popular at the time, while still publishing Plastic Man's solo title. Police Comics only lasted another 25 issues after that.
Does this mean we can now legally make and sell Mickey X Minnie porn comics?
>>146963356DC before they made Batman mainly made anthology mystery and crime stories, which makes sense. So it's safe to say that Police Comics also made crime stories before the superhero boom.
>>146963789Anon don't.
>>146962074Michael Eisner did a lot of good things for Disney but he had a Gestapo obsession with IP control and sued people left and right for using Disney properties in a way he didn't approve of even if they were not for profit.
>>146955735Oh my fucking brother in Allah!Can you please shut the fuck up about muh public domain shit?Fuck!
>>146955804Nope. Because the only people who get excited for public domain shit are weirdo commie culture warriors who think making IPs do degenerate shit is anything but gay as fuck
>>146957300It blows my mind that Captain Marvel and Plastic Man are 100% legal to use, yet everyone is too afraid to use them or doesn't know they can use them. I hope Popeye is not the same.
>>146963868No, this is important and deserves to be discussed.
>>146963918Says who?(You)?A stupid, fucking nobody on the interwebs?
>>146963789Yes, just use the public domain designs and don’t say their full names and you sell anything you want with these two. Any open scenario.
The redpill is it’s 95 years exactly and people just do new years to be safe but all of these are in public domain right now
>>146963959Someone hasn't been reading their bible. A quick look at the public domain shows why it’s so important. It helps preserve art by making it easy to access. Big companies often neglect or abandon works of art they no longer find profitable, leaving it to fade into obscurity. But with the public domain, we can digitize and archive art without navigating through red tape or paying loyalties. It also gives us easier access to knowledge, and creative freedom. It also stops assholes from monopolizing inventions by sitting on the rights without expanding or improving them. It's a good thing and it should be talked about.
>>146963868>>146963959>botslop making demands by being a drama queenkek, it almost looks real
>>146963884Commie spotted
>>146964179Can (You) please shut the fuck up?!
>>146964258No, because you keep responding to the thread, you bot
Don’t care my niggas are free in one hour
Superman will be public domain in 2034Batman will be public domain in 2035
I feel like nothing of importance will come of this
>>146964291FUCK YOU!YOU'RE THE FUCKING BOT, I'M NOT!
>>146964317Only time will tell.
>>146964339Sure thing, bot
>>146964339
>>146960092They plan was to disavow it in favor of the live-action remake
>>146960966We also got A Farewell To Arms in the public domain
Free at last! Free at last!
Do you think we would have gotten anything new and interesting in 2004 has the Sonny Bono Act not passed?That enough 20th century animators and comic book artists were alive and working then to take advantage of it?
>>146964790Indie Superman film, YouTube would have been filled with Disney films
>>146955735The time has come.
>>146955735Is Fables actually public domain or DC still have legal authority to copyright it over the comic creator?
>>146964775Did you draw this?
>>146963789>>146964020you can even use their full names, just don't do something like calling it "walt disney's mickey mouse". "anon's mickey mouse" as a title should be enough to make it clear it's not disney and thus not covered in trademark (don't do shit like using the disney font either etc)
>>146957300Wait, Shazam and Plastic Man are public domain????
>>146963884I'm sorry, but 100 fucking years is more than enough time for a jew-owned corporation to make money off of a cartoon rodent. If anything the copyright term should be no more than 20 years.
>>146958039Lol based retard. He's doing scat.
>>146958798>>146958946Zorro may be public domain but Zorro Productions Inc is very litigious
>>146965333Isn't Walt Disney himself in the public domain now? Can I have Minnie pegging him in the comic and call him by his full name?
>>146966296You can use his likeness in a satire image at any point in time thanks to the first amendment.
>>146965152No, it's from a news article.>>146966173Yeah, their copyright was not renewed so they are public domain.
>>146955735Superman feels like the first one people are actually waiting to drop into public domain to use for proper works.
I'm curious how right wingers of /co/ feel about stuff like this entering the public domain? I'm pretty left but even on the left there seems to be a split on the PD issue which I fine weird.
>>146967252Compared to Popeye yeah I can see more people writing stories. My only fear is that people might see him as too hot to touch, and won't use him.
>>146967437I can't see how anyone could view works like Mickey Mouse shorts, Popeye, or books like All Quiet on the Western Front entering the public domain as a bad thing. It allows these works to become more accessible and shareable to a wider audience. Politics is a hell of a drug.
>>146967480From other pretty left leaning people I know it seems to be mainly that they don't think other people should be able to make anything else with it if a company like Disney is still using it. It'll weaken the brand and all we'll get is shitty horror stuff is what they point out is all they think will come from it. Granted thinking about it now it seems to mainly be hardcore Disney left people I know that are against it so I think in this case it's more Disney is a hell of a cult.
>>146967523I can’t stand the horror argument. The trend of turning public domain properties into horror only really took off with Winnie the Pooh. It completely disregards all the good things that came before those films. This is just a recent phenomenon that will eventually fade away.
>>146967610The horror adaptations are caused by how long these works were protected.If they entered public domain before, there was going to have a lack of shock value
>>146967437"Right-wingers" is a very broad term covering anyone who isn't a leftist, so I can only speak for myself, but copyright is welfare for artists disguised as a perversion of property rights, so anything going into the public domain is always good.
>>146967610There's also a nonzero chance The Mouse and other big corporations are funding these movies to discredit any "unofficial" works.
>>146964339>>146964258Botnigger botmalding
>>146958798Public domain only allows you to make money on the IP without authorisation from the author. There is plenty gay fanarts of tintin
>>146967676Yeah, I don’t think we’re fully prepared to handle legacy characters entering the public domain. If it had happened sooner, it might feel more routine—a big deal, but nothing too outrageous. However, because copyright terms have been stretched so long, we’re now dealing with characters that are nearly 100 years old.These characters have been portrayed in the same way for so long that simply seeing them act or speak in ways their original rights holders wouldn’t approve of has become a spectacle. It’s almost like a rebellion against the decades of corporate control.I’d argue that copyright for work-for-hire creations should last only 30 years. By then, companies have likely made significant profits from the IP and possibly created sequels or spin-offs. If they haven’t, the looming public domain deadline could motivate them to develop more content. Plus, allowing others to use the property would bring competition and creativity.
>>146955735>>A dozen 1929 Mickey Mouse theatrical shorts, including the first with Mickey's voice and with glovesIs that all 1929 shorts?
>>146968970Yes, if Mickey entered by 2004, it would have been guest character and cameos like the Nosferatu in that one SpongeBob episode.>It’s almost like a rebellion against the decades of corporate control.Yes, and there's also the click bait zeitgeist.
>>146969045Yes, plus galloping gaucho & plane crazy with sound.Mickey can speak now.
>>146969045We also got the theme song, Minnie's Yoo Hoohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtPx4y39Bd0
>>146969061Don't forget Horace Horsecollar
What would have been public domain by now? If it wasn't extended during 2004?
>>146965140Not really? Weren't the rights signed to DC?
>>146969244We would be on the cusp of stuff from the 1950s entering public domain. Even further along if we didn't have the 1978 extension.
>>146968970>copyright for work-for-hire creations should last only 30 years.Can you imagine?Mickey Mouse and Popeye would have entered the public domain in 1958 and 1959, respectively. Betty Boop and Pluto would have followed a year later, with Dick Tracy in 1961. Superman and Batman would have been public domain by 1968 and 1967, and Spider-Man by 1992. Hell not /co/ but but Mario in 2011. Some of these characters would have entered public domain right around the height of their popularity, when they were cultural icons. Why can’t we have nice things?
>>146969244Any works created in 1948 or earlier would be in the public domain by 2023. So a lot.
>>146967523Copyright is a privilege, not a right. I would argue it is a moral right, that authors and creators should be given a temporary monopoly over their own work, but the terms are so long as to not reflect that ideal anymore. 95 years is far, far, FAR too long for a person or company to be given a monopoly on their creation. When patents expire after 20 years, what sense does it make for a cartoon rat to take 95?, or even longer?. Modern copyright law benefits only the jewiest of jew-owned corporations, and everyone knows it.
>>146969340Thanks
Since the mad doctor is in public domain, couldn't we use colored Mickey?
>>146969557The Mad Doctor is a black and white short.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPW70q4w5pw&ab_channel=LaserTime
>>146969437And it's so outdated, especially in the context of the internet. It’s far behind how we create, share, and consume content today. A lot of what we do online technically violates copyright law— and I'm not just talking about piracy or torrenting.Posting official artwork of a character just for fun? Illegal without explicit permission. Creating fan animations for YouTube? Technically a violation. Making fan art or remixing a song and sharing it? Also against the rules. Copyright law was created for a time when copying and distributing content was difficult and required significant resources. The way we access and create media has evolved dramatically, but the laws have not.If companies like Disney wanted to be dicks, they could send cease-and-desist for these kinds of things (Remember when Disney once sued a daycare for painting Mickey and friends on its walls) They haven’t gone after everyone online because the internet is so massive, but the fact that they could enforce these outdated rules is absurd.
>>146957300Namor the Submariner is also public domain.
>>146969736Oh, thanks for the correction, I thought it was colored
>>146970059You might be thinking of how it was portrayed in Mickey Mania for the SNES.
>>146958798>Zorro wasn't already public domain? Crazy.Zorro's been public domain. The problem is that there's a rights squatter company who claims to own it and will sue you if you try and use Zorro or make Zorro works. They don't have any case but they get by on the idea that you'd think it's not worth it versus getting tied up in a possibly expensive legal case.
>>146969244It wasn't extended during 2004, it was extended in 1998 (the act took effect in 1999), and even before that there was the extension in 1976, and before that the slow extensions during 1962-1974.If the 1998 extension never happened, then it would be 1949 stuff going public domain this year. That would've meant a significant number of cartoons and comics would've been PD over the last two decades, and that's not even getting into the significant film and literature from the 40s
>>146955804Mickey is too much of a symbol of Disney. You can't just make a straight Mickey Mouse story, it will always seem like a parody.
>>146969999Cool
>>146955735How Public is the Domain?
>>146972734very
>>146966224I agree, especially because original authors can make additional installments that get their own 20 years, so they don't have to lose everything all at once. 1997 was a perfectly reasonable year for the first Star Wars to go PD even if Empire and ROTJ would have to wait for '00 and '03 respectively.
>>146972734You comment under Mickey shorts over YouTube.
>/co/ has done jackshit with them yet
>>146974687You're part of /co/! Get the fire started!
>>146955735in about 110 years, 4chan will enter the public domain
>>146975185Cool
>>146955735Why don't you guys ever do some cool stuff with these public domain superheroes?
>>146958039Do you by chance watch Oneyplays and are passively remembering Chris doing a bit about Popeye saying skibidi to get past censors?
>>146975663I want to anon. you have no idea how badly I want to take all the 1939 and 1940s public domain heroes and heroines and put them all in stories and media and shows and bring them back. I hate how they all are mostly forgot to time and their stories almost completely unread and unknown now.
>>146964170>>146969954I also think laxer laws, in this day and age, assist to actually keep the original works relevant in the public eye. People know about Alice in Wonderland and the Wizard of Oz, but most people have never really sat down and approached the source material; meanwhile, when derivative works featuring those characters are made, it inevitably reminds people that the most notable adaptions exist because everyone is working off the same frame of reference when it comes to those characters. A lot of these older characters are still basically 'evergreen' in terms of their utility (in the sense that, at this point, Betty Boop and Popeye are sort of shaped like themselves, no different than, say, the Scooby Gang) and would certainly get used in some form or another more than they are currently.
>>146964170Yes this is really the main point of PD. The derivative works thing is a bonus that somehow became the main talking point. Scans of Popeye strips can now be posted on Project Gutenberg or something like it for the whole world to read, so everyone can see the source material that made Popeye a cultural touchstone. Before this if you wanted to read them you'd have to hope Fantagraphics or somebody had the license and had them in print at the time.
By the time shit is 95 years old it's often too late for preservation, unless pirates already preserved it in advance
>>146955735Lol, they added Popeye.
>>146977867A great example of this is the golden age cartoons. A lot of them are unrestored, and the window to restore them is time-sensitive. Take the Popeye short A Wolf in Sheik Clothing—by the time Warner Archive restored the 1940s Popeye shorts, the magenta in the original film negative had completely faded. They waited too long, and as a result, we'll never have a version of that cartoon with its original colors intact.If that short had been in the public domain, someone else could have restored it years ago. Who knows how many other cartoons are gradually being lost to time simply because their copyright holders don’t care enough to preserve them?
Daily reminder that Casper is Public Domain.
>>146978323Too bad Casper is the antithesis to what folks do to public domain cartoon characters nowadays. You make him unfriendly, and it's no longer Casper.
>>146978323A Casper and Winnie the Pooh crossover story would be neat.
>>146976397So do it.
>>146955735Mickey said "Hey!" in Steamboat Willie.
>>146961582*Buster Bear.
>>146978292The magenta in the original film negative was already gone by the time AAP got to it, it's likely that they only shot it in 2 strip to save on costs so it was always yellow and cyan from day one.
>>146967437There are libertarians with their objection to protectionism on one hand and conservatives on the other who believe in the creative control over one's life.One argument that comes up sometimes - with which left winger wpuld probably disagree - is that copyright should persist at least 15-20 years after the authors death, so the kids could have their own take on the material before anyone else, release the unfinished parts and secure themselves financially.
>>146978737Well, that sucks. I guess it’s similar to Popeye and the Pirates, where the boob joke was censored and cut from the cartoon while it was still being shown in theaters. There’s a 0% chance of ever seeing the cartoon in its original, unedited form. The public domain can't save them all.
>>146978347What if you made him _too_ friendly?
>>146978926I get the idea of considering the author’s family, but it’s hard to believe that after an author’s death, their work hasn’t already earned enough to give their family a solid financial cushion. 15–20 years just seems silly. While releasing unseen material or parts of a story can be a nice gesture, most families—or the estates managing the work—seem more interested in milking the author's legacy for all it’s worth, as we’ve seen with Zorro and Sherlock Holmes. Rarely do they attempt to genuinely continue the story. And don’t even get me started on how overly strict these families get about music.The one example of an estate that truly respects the creator’s legacy is the Fleischer family. Max Fleischer’s daughter started a small company to uncover and restore old Fleischer Studio cartoons, making them more accessible. But this case rarely happens. In my opinion, copyright after an author’s death should last only 1–2 years, giving the family time to sort out their affairs. At the very least, the work should enter the public domain immediately after the author’s passing.
>>146979012casper the gay ghost
>>146978323I don't believe he is, do you have a SOOOUURCE?.
>>146979100Counter point - if that were the case, Christopher Tolkien would probably never compile and release Silmarillion because making a sense of the unfinshed stuff in such a short time seems impossible.
>>146971421Mind you that that doesn't apply retroactively per Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution. Therefore the 75 year extension in 1978 doesn't apply to stuff made before that, it's covered under the earlier 56 year term.
>>146979144I don't have direct sources, but we can piece together the reasoning. In 1939, a man named Reit created a short story titled The Friendly Ghost while working at Famous Studios. The story was just three pages long, never published, and lacked copyright protection. Reit later showed his work to Joe Oriolo, the head of Famous Studios, who developed it into the 1945 cartoon The Friendly Ghost.Since the original story was never officially published or copyrighted, the 1945 cartoon became Casper's official debut and serves as the source material for the character. Many Casper cartoons, including the early ones, are now in the public domain because their copyrights were never renewed. Additionally, several 1950s Casper comic books have entered the public domain. In a lawsuit against Columbia Pictures, Steven Harvey, president of Harvey Publications Inc., admitted that none of the early 1950s Casper comic copyrights had been renewed.So Casper should be in the public domain. Yes the original short story exists, but it was never published or copyrighted, meaning the cartoon is the main legal source material. After all, how can I violate copyright on a thing I have never seen?
>>146979436Forgot the link.https://cartoonresearch.com/index.php/in-his-own-words-seymour-reit/
>>146971634I think the key is to still go shamelessly edgy with it, just not cynically making him a slasher villain or something. What I'm saying is people should be making Epic Mickey games
>>146957300Man, compared to Popeye, Tintin really got the short end of the stick. Most of Popeye’s secondary and tertiary characters will enter the public domain within the next 1–4 years. Meanwhile, for Tintin:Professor Calculus: 2038Captain Haddock: 2036Thomson and Thompson: 2029Bianca Castafiore: 2034
>>146979977>2038You got to be shitting me, fuck copyright laws.
>>146980047Yep, Red Rackham's Treasure (1943) was his first appearance. We’ll have to wait 13 more years before we can have him acting the goat. Sadly.
>>146978347Honestly I’m surprised no one has tried to make a bad YA novel using him yet, it seems like it’d be a hit with the kiddies
>Popeye’s first appearance is as a random side character recruited by Olive Oyl’s boyfriend to help him and Olive’s brother out>Olive’s boyfriend not only loses his girl to this random sailor he hired, but the entire comic he was the star of to him tooNever has there been canon NTR to such a scale and people have slept on it for years
>>146979151Why would Tolkien's work entering the public domain stop Christopher from releasing The Silmarillion? There would be no legal red tape. The only reason I can think of is that he wouldn’t make any money from it.
>>146980626I mean they kinda tried with that Casper and the Spectrals comic mini that gave us the "What if Wendy the Good Witch was a Soul Eater character?" redesign.
>>146978323Little Audrey is also Public Domain.
>>146960966Also consider that as time goes on, more aspects of the mouse will be public domain. So they're could be people working on stuff but they're keeping it hush hush until a specific date.
>>146979144The court case of Harvey Cartoons v Columbia Pictureshttps://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/645/1564/1498885/Among other things to note:>"Casper" first appeared in a film, copyrighted by Paramount Pictures ("Paramount"), on November 16, 1945. The records of the Copyright Office of the United States ("Copyright Office") indicate that the copyright in this motion picture expired upon a failure of renewal. (Affidavit of Stephen F. Huff, Esq., July 2, 1985, Exhibit M) ("Huff Aff."). The first issue of a "Casper" comic book for which a copyright was obtained was Volume I, Issue No. 2, dated February 1950, copyrighted by Paramount.[1] (Huff Aff., Exhibit M). This earliest "Casper" comic book contains collateral ghosts who appear with "Casper" and who, unlike "Casper," have knotted foreheads. (Huff Aff., Exhibit B). As with *1567 the film referred to above, the copyright in this comic book also lapsed upon failure of renewal.>By January of 1984, all copyright registrations for issues of "Casper" comics predating 1956 had expired. At his deposition, Steven Harvey, plaintiff's president, conceded that none of the copyrights in the "Casper" comics from the early 1950's had been renewed. (Transcript of Plaintiff's Deposition, May 1, 1985 (pp. 1-145), continued on May 22, 1985 (pp. 146-241), at 200-01) ("P. Dep."). Moreover, Mr. Harvey conceded that failure to renew the copyrights was based on a willful and deliberate decision of Harvey.>The Court finds that the pictorial representation of "Fatso," as he appears in Harvey's comic books with expired copyrights, has entered the public domain. Accordingly, the alleged similarities between the "Ghostbusters" logo and "Fatso" concern only non-copyrightable elements of plaintiff's work. For this reason alone[9] Harvey has failed to establish copyright infringement and its motion for summary judgment with respect to the copyright claim is denied.[10]
>>146962042Magic doesn't exist you fucking retard. Money is king. Dumb bitches like you are why I drink.
>>146981476
>>146981420Yes, he is voiced now.And you can make him play pianos or sell hotdogs
>>146981476>Money is kingOy Vey!
>>146981497Bet you wouldn't be so fucking snide with my dick up your ass fagboy
>>146981510And swordfight, drink, smoke and shoot machine guns.
Of course /co/ggers are obsessed with "gibs me dat".
>>146981811You mean you're obsessed with it
>>146981811Sorry, (((Bob Iger))).
Has anyone made a fighting game with public domain characters yet? That'd be fun.
>>146975663How do you honestly make them Iconic as Superman?
>>146981243Tweety is in the public domain, but only his early beta design. You can’t refer to him as "Tweety" in your story—not due to trademark laws, but because he wasn’t given that name until after the short A Tale of Two Kitties. However, everything else—his speech patterns, voice, and even the phrase "I Tawt I Taw a Puddy Tat"—is public domain and free to use.
>>146981823I didn't make this thread.>>146981829Make your own original shit. Don't lap up someone else's.
>>146982001The most unoriginal people are the ones who complain about the public domain and tell people to make original shit
>>146982001>Make your own original shitI can’t stand when people say this. Do you really think that taking a story I didn’t create and then adding to it or twisting aspects of it doesn’t result in something new? Sure, it might not be entirely original, but honestly, very few things are—most creations are a mix of ideas and influences from other works. My creation isn’t any less valid just because I’m using someone else’s work as a foundation.
>>146982001Are you a retard?, what did you think Disney themselves did for 95% of their history?. Oh yeah, adapt PUBLIC DOMAIN fairy tales and stories for dumb golem like you to consoom. What about all the zombie and vampire stories?, yep, also based on public domain stories. Our entire media landscape is made up of "someone else's shit" retold and reimagined.
>>146971020Ah, the Harmony Gold strategy.
>>146981806Those were from last year, together with "sexually assaulting Minnie"
>>146982001>Make your own original shit. Don't lap up someone else'sThe people who made these cartoons are long gone by now.These shorts are older than my grandparents.
>>146982125Yeah, zombies are only as widespread as they are because Night of the Living Dead went into public domain immediately because they forgot to put on the copyright notice on the film.
>>146982461Serious?
>>146982523not that anon but yup the OG 1968 night of the living dead is public domain. there's actually quite a few movies in public domain and cartoons and comics and other media like music and radio serials even. There is such a vault of goods from the 1900s til about the 1960s alone to pull out of storage and do something with again in many catagories
>>146982523NTA, but the concept of Zombies was originally like some voodoo magic shitNowadays its commonly asssociated disease because of the film industry
>>146982523yeah copyright is automatically ceded in the US now, but back then you had to declare it, and they accidentally fucked up that declaring statementlots of 70s comics are PD for the same reason
>>146982550>>146982554>>146982556Thanks, I knew the movie was in pd, but I wasn't aware that it was because they didn't declare it as IP at all.
>>146982579I believe that movie you americans love about the guy who sees a world where he didn't exist for christmas is in a similar situation and it's why it keeps playing on tv thereit's a wonderful life, remembered the name after writing the post and too lazy to go back and edit it
>>146982637I heard about it being in a legal limbo.
>>146982637Thats kind of fucking tragic... I thought it played every year because its a feel good story about suicide prevention during a time period where roping is at an all time high
>>146982637That one is more of a complicated situationIt was public domain for a long while till the lawyers found a loophole, claim that part of it was still copyrighted because it was based on a story that was still copyrighted. That's why there's that abridged version that people raised an uproar about recently, it's the public domain parts of the film without the part that was still copyrightedBut the reason it became well-known was because when it was in the public domain and many channels played it during the holiday season for decades
>>146982637great movie and yes I think it is public domain. the sheer amount of stuff up til about 1980 (I said 1960s earlier and ment 1980s) is staggering. thats just things like I mentioned here >>146982550 thats not getting into toys and other things. even cars exist that have expired patents and are technically public domain (Theres some bs laws with it though so its not true public domain)go on internet archives and go browse through some old magazines and catalogs and store advertisements from the 1900s til about 1950 and odds are a bunch of the stuff you see is public domain or unowned. toys being examples, things like old radios and vinyl players brands are now public domain as are old tiny portable radio brands. old magazines and stuff are public domain if you dig around a bit. basically go to jan 1st 1980 and any date before that has a possible item somewhere in public domain. alot of it is tied behind silly laws similar to comics but yeah tons of stuff just hey thats public domain enjoy. music and songs and movies and all sorts of stuff I could relist. its all hidden away using search engines but you can dig up stuff still. though 10 years ago it was a simple google of public domain radio brands and oh there's a bunch of stuff now its like getting specific and shit to get the listings. pozzed modern net hiding things like this./autism typeup over
>>146982700I wonder if another movie would receive this treatment, "talkies" are starting to enter PD.But it is a decade until juggernauts like the wizard of oz.
>>146982952I swear to god if I die before we get a Popeye beat 'em up. Hell, I'll take a point-and-click game at this point.
>>146982952Peak character design and nothing has ever topped it.
>>146983039I think we need a gamedev to start working on this now, by the time they're done all the basic Popeye materials will be available and they can sell the game
So if someone makes a popeye comic and it happens to have a similarity with vol 5. #43 chapter 2 then he can get sued into oblivion anyway?
>>146982952Hey, that's not a minnie..
Thinking about it: once Superman hits the public domain, would the fleischer cartoon interfere on what you can or cannot do with him?
>>146981580No, it's not, John K is proof of this.
>>146983586I know, I wasn't the one saying that, the other anon was, hence why I greentexted it to reply with the oy vey bit.
>>146983393>similarity with vol 5. #43 chapter 2what comic are you talking about?
>>146983448You can only use content from Action Comics published in 1938. This means you’re limited to his classic look, his pre-retcon origin story, and the following elements.Jor-L: (mentioned only, not shown on screen).KryptonHis earth parents: John Kent and Mary Kent (mentioned only, not shown on screen).George Taylor: The editor of the Daily Star (not Daily Planet, which didn’t appear until two years later). He essentially fills Perry White’s role.Lois LaneJimmy OlsenAs for powers, Superman didn’t have many of his iconic abilities yet. He lacked heat vision and super breath. However, thanks to the Fleischer animated shorts, you can depict him flying, as that was the first instance of him doing so. (Side note: X-ray vision appeared in one of the Fleischer shorts but originated in the 1940s comics.)You won’t be able to use kryptonite, Lex Luthor, Metallo, Toyman, or Brainiac—you’ll have to invent your own villains.That’s all I can think of off the top of my head!
>>146982001Almost every piece of media we have comes from material that is publicly available for use for everyone everywhere or was created originally as a rip off of something else>>146983898I think what turns off most people from using characters in the Public Domain is that the ones everyone wants to use once they enter have almost none of the aspects of them that people liked about them>Can't use Kryptonite, can't use Lex Luthor, can't use Jimmy Olsen, Braniac, Lois Lane, can't even reference his backstoryWhat would be the point if I have to recreate Superman
>>146957895At worst, you might have to show him eating spinach off-screen, and honestly, if that’s the trade-off, I’m fine with it. I hate to say it, but Popeye feels like he’s missing half his identity without spinach. Hopefully, King Features won’t be very anal or unreasonable about its use.
>>146984072They won't let Nintendo rerelease the arcade game on Switch through Hamster's Arcade Archives without a royalty that Nintendo feels that it's too high, they will be that unreasonable.Once we get to 2029 when the first Fleischer cartoon is released then Nintendo/Hamster can rerelease that game.
>>146984044No, you can absolutely use Jimmy Olsen, Lois Lane, and Superman’s original backstory—they all first appeared in 1938. The restrictions mainly apply to his well-known villains and kryptonite, which came later. That said, yeah I agree. Not being able to use many of his most iconic elements will make the idea of using him less appealing to a lot of people. That’s the challenge with older characters that have ever-growing lore.>What? I can’t use this yet? Well, then I don’t want the character at all he’s worthless!If you couldn't depict him flying, I think even fewer people would be interested in using him. It’s like Popeye and his spinach—thankfully, Popeye can still have his spinach, or else nobody would want to touch that character either.
>>146984186The arcade game has its own copyright. This copyright is separate from the copyright on the characters featured in the game. Even if the characters eventually enter the public domain, the game itself can remain copyrighted.If Nintendo still requires approval from King Features, it likely means King retains some rights related to the game. This all depends on the specifics of the contract between King Features and Nintendo. This situation is different from Warner Bros., which doesn’t need King Features’ permission to release Popeye DVDs and Blu-rays because Warner fully owns the shorts (Though they still put a legal disclaimer on the back of the box that King owns Popeye)Fun fact: the arcade game was even referenced in the Popeye comic strip!
>>146984436Everything about the game itself is own by Nintendo, King Features owns the characters and theme song but original music and game code, engine and assets are 100% own by Nintendo, so it's just the characters and music that have to fall under PD before Nintendo/Hamster can rerelease it.I know Namco released a mobile port but they did pay Nintendo for that.
Were there other copyright slips like the superman cartoon or Popeye spinach?
>>146984532Six episodes from the 1960s Popeye cartoons are in the public domain due to an error in the copyright date. Instead of listing the correct date as MCMLX (1960), they mistakenly used MCMXL (1940).
I just watched a Foxy the fox, cartoon, he was just Mickey with slightly different ears and a thicker tail.>>146984856Thanks.
Can we use a Oswald with teal pants? Since the king of jazz is in public domain?
>>146985286Yeah, there's a reason the Foxy cartoons weren't considered important enough to renew. On the other hand it means you can basically treat them as fodder for Mickey stuff- you can easily merge stuff from "Lady Play your Mandolin" into "Gallopin Gaucho"
I would like someone to make tasteful, long form story arcs of these characters with classic style artwork and scrooge like runs.
>>146955735Could you imagine?
>>146985431I would like to do those but unfortunately it takes a long time to do so while also paying bills
>>146985342Yes, that was the first color appearance of Oswald, so it's fair game.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bzizz-v8xXA&ab_channel=AzUrArInG
>>146985535Apparently flip the frog is under public domain
>>146983336>by the time they're done all the basic Popeye materials will be available and they can sell the gameSadly the materials need to already be in PD before you start work on the project. Stupid and annoying, but the way it is.
>>146985846Not within the framework of an indie game, where development is often made for free until the time for selling. At that point you're basically just making a fan game, which yeah is technically illegal, but who's gonna act upon it? Just develop it by yourself, and when ready, sell it.Of course, nothing in gamedev is "just" as simple as that, but in terms of legality, there you go
>>1469859404chan is the best place to get business advice.
>>146963730Thank you for the knowledge
>>146985987I mean, being real, yeah you probably shouldn't just be following my advice, random anon; but just think on it by yourself. How many fangames, fan comics, etc, get to be made? Simply choose materials for a specific year, say, "this game will contain stuff that'll be public domain in 2027"; develop it throughout 2025 and 2026 just like you would a fangame, so, not making money from it; but then once 2027 starts, then start selling it. That's not 4chan advice, it's simple extrapolation from existing fan projects and how they get treated.
>>146964736Screw AFTA; I want Johnny Got His Gun to get in the public domain so I can publish my cyborg Joe Bonham comic I drew in high school that nearly got me expelled when one of my teachers found some of the pages I drew.
>>146986282Well, you got 8 years to go. Enough time to redraw that comic
>>146983898They never mentioned the name Krypton or the names of his parents (Kryptonian or Earth) in the 1938 stuffJimmy Olsen also was not named until the radio show. They retroactively said that he first appeared in 1938 many years later, but he was never named Jimmy Olsen in 1938.However if it turns out the first months of the 1939 comic strip had their copyrights invalidated because they had missing/incomplete copyright notices, then that means you can use Krypton, Jor-L, and Lora (Superman's Kryptonian mom's original name), since they were name and shown in those comic strips. Only foster mom Mary Kent got a name (in the 1939 comic) and Mr Kent didn't get a name till 1942 when he was named Eben while his wife was renamed Sarah.Eben Kent wasn't named John Kent until 1948
At least get the porn started the Disney characters had a lot of porn made when the went into the PD
>>146986582The radio show is already public domain, the script may still be under copyright
>>146986704Yeah that was the part I wasn't sure about
>>146986282How did you nearly get expelled? The title having the word "gun" in it? Or was it the character wanting to be euthanized?
>>146986649How would that work?
>>146981212Holy shit, I'm in love.
Is it possible to potentially reduce all the bullshit extension laws?Surely they can be reduced from 95 to like 70 at least
>>146988406If Trump is Based enough to repeal the 1998 act, then yes.
>>146988417Trump is a plutocrat, not a populist. He'd sooner give himself a second circumcision than take one cent away from a corporation.
>>146988417They would definitely assassinate him for that one
Copyright at Life of author+X years….but what happens when Life of authors starts to be…a bit more permanent?If I’m still to early for immortality after getting supreme fame and fortunes from my bathroom scribbles getting published and spiraling off into the new modern mythology aka Star Wars and marvel but owned by me.….what happens to the copyright if I place myself into a state of suspended animation to extend myself out as a vegetable for a good 200 years more?
>>146981806Huh, now I remember that mickey mouse FPS
>>146988707Except not really, it more depends if the Hollywood is willing to bend over when it comes to the culture wars.
>>146989106forgot the linkhttps://www.cbsnews.com/news/republicans-target-mickey-mouse-disney-copyrights-florida-dont-say-gay-law/
Can /co/ recommend me some good public domain superheroes and superhero comics to read? I really don't know where to start?
>>146984186Given that the horror movie Popeye the Slayer Man features him eating spinach in the trailer, it likely falls into one of two scenarios:1)The movie is not on King Features radar.2)King Features is aware and does not care.It’s probably a "wait and see" situation to find out if they respond.
>>146981212>Hot topic the comic.
>>146989076Nothing will change—it could be the year 8034, and we’d still be stuck with the same outdated copyright laws. If anything, suspended animation might be exploited as a loophole. Life of the author copyright terms could become even more problematic as human lifespans continue to increase.
>>146969061>Mickey can speak now.Voice copyright is a tricky subject. While a character’s voice itself isn’t directly copyrighted, it can be protected under trademark law if it’s distinctive and closely tied to the character’s brand identity. For example, Disney could argue that imitating Mickey Mouse’s high-pitched voice might cause brand confusion.Similarly, Popeye’s voice, though distinctive, is more contextual. His gruff tone reflects his persona as a smoker, and the high-pitched aspect may stem from the way he mispronounces words in the comics. It's kinda impossible to read a Popeye comic without sounding like him.In contrast, Mickey’s voice is deliberately unnatural and likely unique enough for Disney to take legal action if someone were to mimic it too closely. Consider Bugs Bunny’s “What’s up, doc?” the phrase itself isn’t copyrighted, but if someone replicated Mel Blanc’s specific delivery, it could lead to legal challenges.
>>146989593It could be argued that a character's voice is integral to what they are, and that can't be covered by trademark law. But Mickey's voice isn't exactly great to begin with, I'd be happy if the high-pitched voice was replaced by something less obnoxious. Especially Donald fucking Duck.
>>146988406On the bright side at least the USA is not Mexico. For you see in Mexico copyright is the FULL one hundred years. Holy hell that country is trash. And they are trash for other reasons not even related to illegal immigration and the drug cartels.
>>146990109What you just said about Mario is 100% fake.>>146989915100% fake.>>146989593Mickey said "Hey" in Steamboat Willie.
>>146989121I saw some people say good things about the magician from Mars
>>146979977I'm still a bit curious to see how this applies as it's only the US copyrights laws that make Tintin public domain, so any atempts of making a movie or a candy bar will still be considered illegal in most of the places that cares about Tintin (europe)
>>146955735>and with glovesfilmwise
>>146955735Is it me or doea famous studios had more racist humor than the ones in fleischer?
>>146990767That went away once we got to the 1950s.
King Features included clauses in their contracts with Hollywood studios requiring that films adapting their comic strip creations be destroyed after ten years. Exceptions were only made due to popular demand for works like the Popeye cartoons, the sound Krazy Kat cartoons, and Blondie movies. As a result, many King Features movie adaptations are now considered lost. Entire pieces of art were destroyed simply because they were deemed unimportant, and film deterioration further compounded the issue. Many cartoons from this era decayed due to improper storage. By the 1960s and 70s, the only cartoons readily available were the mega-popular ones that aired on TV. For anything else, you had to search extensively.
>>146990835They still have cannibal and native american stereotypes
>>146990877I said by the 1950s.
>>146990863Yes, they should have entered public domain decades ago.
>>146990863And they wonder why Popeye and their other characters fell to irrelevancyDisney and Looney Tunes reran their works for eternity, they destroyed most works
>>146989915I think Felix the Cat in the 90s show had a pretty good take (two, even, since each season had a different actor) on "Mickey-like cartoon falsetto voice, but done more naturalistic", and it's the direction I'd like a PD Mickey taken in
>>146990636I think the EU has a "rule of the shorter term" clause when it comes to copyright, I believe. So Tintin may in fact be public domain over there now as well, just as Steamboat Willie and the other Mickey shorts apparently are.
>>146991633Nah, the EU, and in fact basically the entire world but the US, has the rule be a simple "life of the author plus a few decades". In most EU countries, it's 70 years. Tintin's going public domain here in 2053. The silver lining is once that happens, it'll be the entire oeuvre, rather than just "the works up to X year".
>>146982952The Goon and Popeye crossover when?
An unavailable Winkler Oswald short that just lapsed called "Suicide Shiek" has been uploaded. Description claims this was what inspired Gottfredson's Suicide Mickey comic strips.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cikTQbmbz_c&feature=youtu.be
>>146991212Could you Imagine if Popeye had entered the public domain during the comic strip boom of the 1960s—he would have been massive.
>>146991749>Tintin's going public domain here in 2053.That’s tough—by 2038, the U.S. will have the entire cast of characters. However, I do like the idea that all of an author’s works, not just those from specific years, enter the public domain together. That’s a policy the U.S. should consider adopting.
>>146991846It's age-restricted, are you serious?
>>146991749>Walt Disney.>Died at 1966.>1966 + 70 = 2033>Up to the jungle book.
>>146992163>Disney finally decides to emphasize the various directors of these things for the purposes of arguing that public domain can't have them just yet in those countries.
>>146991749There are countries where it's Life + 50 years. Still WAY too high, but at least it's better. In fact, under such terms the works of J.R.R Tolkien would've entered the public domain 'last year'. Same with C.S Lewis and Ian Fleming, which would be several years earlier. Canada had such terms before it was extended in late 2022 to 70 years.
>>146992163>>146992280Unfortunately they'd be right. Mind, I'm not a lawyer, just a layman who's read a lot on this stuff, but from what I can tell, in big collaborative projects like a movie, they get covered by the multiple copyrights of the multiple people working on them. Walt is in effect irrelevant- to know when Disney's Jungle Book becomes fully public domain, you in effect have to find who of its creators was the last to die and count from him.Now, you might point out that in the case of Tintin, Hergé had assistants, who died after him- so why are the books going to become PD based on the year of his death? And the answer is, I don't know. Maybe it's down to credits- in a movie like Jungle Book, the workers are credited, but as far as I recall, no assistants were named in any Tintin book. But I might be entirely wrong- again, not a lawyer.
>>146991846Worth pointing that as far as we know, Gottfredson wasn't the one who decided to do the suicide series of strips, but rather it was one of Walt's last writing requests before he stopped interacting with the newspaper strip
>>146992325I agree. I'm not a "no copyright ownership" radicalist, but I do think to me that life+25 years is probably as much as it's needed, or maybe even something more based on the American work for hire standard but with renewals- say 75 years after creation of the work, but with the need to renew it at the 25 and 50 year mark, so that there's a lot of opportunity for works to not be renewed and go into the PD where their authors or copyright owners are no longer upkeeping them
>>146992436It was mostly a joke, but it is crazy to think that stuff like star wars may only end up as public domain by the 2100s
>>146980897In his final years Tolkien felt he would never get the Silmarillion all sorted out and left it to Christopher to arrangeBut in such a scenario why wouldn't he be able to sell the presentable work? It wasn't public knowledge so only LOTR and Hobbit etc would be affected
>>146983039If Bluto is player 2 who will be the boss
>>146992491Way to fucking complicated. You get 25 years from the date of creation until it becomes public domain. No exceptions. If you can't make your millions in 25 years you suck and your """property""" sucks.
>>146991235Popeye was the one from King Features that didn't fell into irrelevancy till almost the same time as Looney Tunes, for the reason that >>146990863 mentionedNot only were his cartoons popular enough to survive the King Features contract, they lasted long to be rerun on network television and gained a secondary life thereThe completely lost stuff would be like a Snuffy Smith cartoon or two, and some others that I can't remember right now
>>146992615That is most ideal, but realistically I would settle for the lowest possible limit given all the international treaties our "democratically elected officials" signed onto for us. Under the Berne Convention, the lowest term for copyright is Life + 50 years. Ideally it would be 25 years 'after publication', but it would take a Christian King to be that sensible and Based. No whore politician would ever betray their (((corporate))) masters.
I kind of like the hoop-jumping some works do to avoid using copyrighted characters directly, so entering public domain makes that unnecessaryIt's like League of Extraordinary Gentlemen vs Planetary
>>146992491I think life for a single, creator-owned work (like a novel) and 25 years for collective ownership/work for hire would be fine. Work for hire is deliberately way shorter because most of the serious problems from copyright law these days are from immortal companies squatting on rights. It's life for creator-owned works so the same immortal companies can't just wait a few years and pillage some poor guy's life work. (But I'm willing to accept cutting that down if it's too much trouble)Anything much longer than the life of a person isn't worth it. Authors children can get real jobs along with the rest of us. Cases like Christopher Tolkien are rare enough I'm willing to sacrifice him for advantages everywhere else.
>>146992601I figure you'd end up fighting eachother. Listen to this:>Each stage starts with Olive Oyl getting into some kind of peril (kidnapped by Alice the Goon, stuck on a pair of runaway skis, etc)>Popeye & Bluto work together to get through the level and reach her>Unique boss fight to resolve the peril>Followed by unique PVP encounter. Not just interchangeable environmental hazards, but actual changes to control scheme. Like Mario Party minigames, but stretched out a little longer.>Possible twist of advantage determination based upon whoever beat up more bad guys in the side-scroller segment.
>>146988417I doubt it only because he had Canada sign a trade agreement in 2020 that included extending their copyright term from Life + 50 to Life + 70
>>146992711I can imagine this also as like, a splitscreen arcade-style game. both popeye and bluto racing to olive, if one reaches earlier enough, they win, but if they reach at the same time (within a certain leeway), then it becomes single-screen and they fight
>>146992436In the U.S. there are two main standards. Fixed Term Standard 95 years: For works classified as "works made for hire" or corporate works. And Life + 70 Standard. Walt Disney and Ub Iwerks are credited as Mickey Mouse's creators, but Mickey and his cartoons are classified as works made for hire under Disney Studios. Therefore, Mickey Mouse follows the Fixed Term Standard and does not depend on the creators' lifespans. Similarly, E.C. Segar created Popeye for King Features, so his work also falls under the Fixed Term Standard.In the U.S., Tintin is not treated as an independent work, like Sherlock Holmes, so no Life + 70 Standard. Instead, he gets the Fixed Term Standard. In the E.U., Tintin is considered a work tied closely to Hergé as an individual author, so it follows the Life + 70 Standard. This difference also explains why Popeye entered the public domain in the E.U. around 2009. The E.U. views E.C. Segar as Popeye's true creator, so it applied the Life + 70 Standard to Segar’s works.>Hergé had assistants, who died after him- so why are the books going to become PD based on the year of his death?Joint Works are a thing, but assistants or collaborators who do not contribute significantly to the creative process do not count as co-creators. Bud Sagendorf was a well-known assistant to E.C. Segar, but his involvement wasn’t substantial enough to be recognized as co-creation. So assistants or some guy saying "You should draw him like that or add this to the story" don't count.I'm also not a lawyer so take what I say with a grain of salt lol.
>>146992551Unpublished works remain copyrighted, so in this scenario, The Silmarillion would enter the public domain alongside J.R.R. Tolkien's other books after this death. Christopher Tolkien could still earn some revenue, though likely not a significant amount. In this hypothetical scenario, the story of The Silmarillion would become public domain, but the specific edition or compilation published by Christopher could receive its own copyright protection. For example, take The Thimble Theatre & the Pre-Popeye Comics of E.C. Segar. The original comic strips (1919–1928) are public domain, but the book is not. Uploading the book itself online would violate copyright law because, even though the strips are public domain, the arrangement and presentation of the book are protected.This means Christopher could sell the book, and if he found PDF uploads or raw scans of the edition he compiled, he could legally issue takedown notices. The only legal way to share The Silmarillion would be to obtain and share the original unpublished manuscripts Christopher owns or to rewrite it word for word from scratch. Similarly, bootlegged copies of Christopher’s edition would also remain illegal.Of course, this is all hypothetical.
>>146991235Popeye is still relevant as kids still love Popeye.
>>146993771Kids don't know who the fuck Popeye is. Mickey Mouse and Looney Tunes are more relevant to them.
>>146993873Yes they do, MeTV Toons is proof of this and the DVDs and Blu-Rays are still selling in the millions.
>>146992711>I figure you'd end up fighting each otherI could see it playing out like Double Dragon 1, where the true final boss is Jimmy, but in two-player mode, you play as Billy and Jimmy together. After defeating the fake final boss, the game forces Player 1 and Player 2 to fight each other to the death. So basically after taking down the Sea Hag, Popeye and Bluto would turn on each other, fighting to decide who gets to take Olive home.
>>146994003You be playing as Popeye and Ham Gravy, not Billy and Jimmy.
>>146993931NTA. But to be fair, the DVDs and Blu-rays are primarily bought by adults
>>146994040For their kids.But really for all ages.
>>146984856A lot of the 50s shorts are public domain as well for lack of renewal.
>>146991811I hope they actually do that now that they can
>>146955735I want to see the Whiffle Hen start appearing in other comics as a power up
>>146991749This would get abused hard if it was allowed now.Copyright is automatic, but this comes to who the "author+authors" are. Let's say Bambi decided one of the VAs was also one of the "authors" for the film. They are still alive. Would this mean that the clock for 70 years hasn't even started yet for Bambi?Disney would make sure something like their newest theatrical films will have "co-authors" who are around age 9 to make sure they'd get at least 150 years of copyright
>>146995869>Let's say Bambi decided one of the VAs was also one of the "authors" for the film. They are still alive. Would this mean that the clock for 70 years hasn't even started yet for Bambi?It would mean the vocal track would not be considered PD, but the script or visuals might be, is my understanding.
It's not relevant to the discussion or anything but I was searching for Popeye stuff and well
>>146996226perfeck figger indeed, why do you think olive fell for him
>>146996226more revelations
>>146966244same thing with tarzan and john carter
>No Popeye vs Dan Backslide game
>>146996316yeah, popeye being intersex has been public knowledge for a while. The twitter even made a comment about it using that exact panel, and a second tweet in reply to someone else mentioning another panel where Popeye states once again how he's amphibious.>https://web.archive.org/web/20210715204834/https://twitter.com/PopeyeTweetsk/status/1415775114004676614
>>146997041Thats meant to treated as a joke, not seriously.Popeye is a cis gender male, not a futanari.Also male cartoons characters just dressed up like women all the time back then, mostly with Bugs Bunny.
>>146997094It seems serious to me, although that guy fucked up calling him intersex when he meant non-binary.Intersex implies a physical marker, non-binary is purely mental.
>>146997288anon the baiting doesn't work when he calls himself male in that panel that was just posted tooif anything if you wanted to be considering this joke seriously what he's doing is degendering the word "mother", rather than affirming he's a woman
>>146997288The mental part is super recent, as in last year recent.Before 2024 Intersex and non-binary were the same thing.Anyway, Popeye/Thimble Theater is a comedy comic, and things like that are meant to be treated as jokes, you don't do that for Bugs Bunny, and Popeye (like all cartoon characters from that time) is the same song and dance.
>>146997512Oh, you meant the COMIC was a joke.No, I knew that, I thought we were talking about the tweet.
>>146996764
Copyright in practice isn't a real thing.
>>146997913Cool. You made this just now?
>>146999090yeah
>>146983898That's still enough to make the foundation of a new superhero 'verse. Golden Age Supes' will provide an entertaining competitor against whatever new Rogues' gallery you can conjure against him. Perhaps instead of Lex Luthor, your arch nemesis to him can be someone entirely new that mirrors him in a different, all-new way? Maybe he can have a new cast of supporting characters. It's a blank check to write an Elseworlds story without DC breathing down your neck with their stipulations. >>146984044Because there is a 3/4 chance you're going to use a Superman expy anyway, so why not go with the real deal?
>>146999684It'd be cool to have a Superman with actual limitations instead of him being the equivalent of Arale, with nonsensical powers.
So Dragon Ball will be public domain in 2094?, sweet!. Can't wait!.
>>1470001232081 actually.2061 in Japan as their copyright law only lasts 75 years.
>>147000182The 95 year term in the U.S only applies to creations before 1974 I think. Any creations made after that expire Life + 70 years. 70 + 24 = 94. So 2094.
>>146997913good shit
>>146958556Quality Comics is the company, Police Comics was their flagship title
>about to create a comic>hear on news that copyright law has been revealed from a gorillion and 15 years down to just a gorillion and 10 years>no longer motivated to create
>>146989076>>146989538Lawyers will have 70 years to convince a judge that someone who shows no signs of life can not be considered to have been alive in that time, and therefore the posthumous copyright timer will be ticking down during your freeze.After all, preserving a human is easy. It's resuscitation afterwards that's the hard part. So preserved people are effectively dead until proven otherwise.
>>146994293God the 50s shorts suck ass. Not a single S tier.
>>146996226As always Wimpy does it better than Popeye.
>>146955735Do you think major companies have an unspoken agreement to avoid using each other's intellectual properties once they enter the public domain? Something like, "You don't use our characters, and we won't use yours"?Take Popeye and Mickey Mouse, for example. They're big characters, yet I bet no major companies will touch them—not necessarily out of fear, because plenty of companies are as big as Disney or King Features. It feels more like an unspoken, secret agreement. Captain Marvel has been in the public domain for decades, and nothing significant has been done. I imagine the same will happen with characters like Darth Vader when their time comes.
>>147001798I also think so, Mickey is also really "rigid" right now.It will take a while for him to become like Dracula.
>>147001798>Legendary has to call King Kong just "Kong" to avoid any sort issues with Universal>Universal tried to argue Copyright infringment on Nintendo's "Donkey Kong"Even when in Public Domain you still get Corpo's being stingy and greedyWe could be getting some genuine Felix the Cat or Oswald the Lucky Rabbit material here but instead we just don't. Even their "Owners" don't seem super interested in using them.I think part of the reason is because Corpo's don't want people knowing they don't necessarily own these characters anymore and that you yourself can do as you please with them however you like so long as it's within legal reason, so Corpo's don't supply demand in hopes that this causes people to beg "them" for literally anything of these characters and this will make people become ignorant to the fact that these characters are of free use
Will the goddess of spring enter public domain by 2029?
>>147002219If you approached a lawyer, editor, or legal representative of DC Comics and asked whether Plastic Man is in the public domain, I can almost guarantee they would outright deny it and claim he isn't, hoping you'd take their word for it.
>>147002373Off by one year. 2030 is when it will enter the public domain.
>>146955735>Just a dime, ten cents to see the hoochie-coochie dance!What did they mean by this?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH4U02kXOq0&ab_channel=ifthis
>>146980858tags: female:netorare, female:cheating, female:ryona, male:ryona
>>147001457Herman and Katnip was Famous Studio's main focus by that point, but Popeye was the only thing that made money.>>147001798Disney will for Fox sitcoms.Nintendo will once the rest of Popeye's contents enter the public domain (being Wimpy, Sweet Pea and Popeye's theme song since Brutis is already public domain due to his first short not being properly copyrighted).Nintendo would do the same with Doki Doki Panic as part of "Mario History" if Fuji TV wasn't a issue.
>>147002603>>146985458>>146959882Am I the only one who prefers Popeye's older design? I really like his longer, pointier chin and his longer nose.
>>147002648Fun fact about Herman and Katnip: It was actually the cartoon being parodied by Itchy and Scratchy, not Tom and Jerry. Mike Reiss, a writer and producer, described it as a "cheap, ultra-violent knockoff" of Tom and Jerry. David Silverman also said that Herman and Katnip is "hilarious because it's just bad."
>>147002740Did Famous Studios do anything good in the 50s?
>>147002679I think the longer nose especially is fun in the design and is something worth going back to
>>146955735What if Superman got public domain early?
>>146979977there are so many stock thirties characters to choose from you could fill out the roster pretty quickly. if you're lazy, you could make similar ones that are women
>>147003009Famous Studios peaked in the 1940s. They produced some standout content like Popeye, Superman, and Little Lulu shorts. The Noveltoons and Screen Songs were more hit-or-miss. The 1950s were meh. They had some ok shorts like Casper, Little Audrey, Herman and Katnip, and continued Noveltoons, but their output was overall mediocre. The shorts from this era, though not that poorly animated, were incredibly dull. Compared to the 40s, the '50s cartoons were a clear downgrade—everything felt slower, the writing deteriorated, and many plots or gags were blatantly recycled from Fleischer shorts. "Background noise" is an apt description for much of their output during this time.the 1960s is not worth talking about. Those cartoons have no redeeming qualities and look like Hanna-Barbera productions in both style and quality. The art is so flat and lifeless.
Why hasnt anyone made horror movie of Popeye or Tintin like they have done with Mickey Mouse and Winnie the pooh
>>147003709early superman couldnt even fly, that came laterplus youd be missing iconic villains lex luthor, brainiac, darkseid, bizarro, etcvery early on youd only get the ultra humanite
>>147004080They're making one with Popeye.
>>147003709How early?
>>147004115Huh, looks like it didnt get as much attention as the mickey horrorshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wbUKGpfHQU
>>147003709Why would it? We just have to wait a decade
>>147004020Pretty much.Except that Hanna Barbera between 1957-1963 still had alot of merit in them due to Michael Maltese and Warren Foster's writing and Ed Benidict's designs.1964-1967 was still fine but you can tell things got blander and both Bill and Joe wanted to retire once the years went on.We don't talk about 1968-1984.But by 1985 John K rebooted The Jetsons ands that started to fix the studio and by 1992 the studio recovered with 2 Stupid Dogs, but post 1992 Hanna-Barbera is another story for another day.
>>146984471One major hurdle is international copyright laws. While Popeye and his friends and music might be in the public domain in the U.S. or the EU now or later, that’s not necessarily the case in countries like Japan, Brazil, Russia, or many others. This means the rights would only allow them to legally sell a game in certain parts of the world.What's the point of releasing a game when over a third of the world wouldn’t legally be able to buy it? And if they bundled it into a collection set, it could lead to even more complications and legal challenges.
>>147004277>While Popeye and his friends and music might be in the public domain in the U.S. or the EU now or later, that’s not necessarily the case in countries like Japan, Brazil, Russia, or many others.If their copyright term is Life + 70 years then the all the E.C. Segar Popeye comics were public domain back in 2009 the same as in Europe. This is one of the few times where Life + 70/etc works out because of how far back Segar died.
>>147004277>>147004342Most of the world IS synchronised in this, if not because of the Berne convention, then because of later agreements such as the 2018 TPP. In general if something is PD in Europe you can assume it also is everywhere else, except maybe the US.
>>147004097>early superman couldnt even fly, that came laterTechnically, the depiction of Superman flying originates from the Fleischer shorts, which are in the public domain. The comics later adopted this version of the character. This means that interpretation of Superman is fair game. At worst, you might need to make your Superman resemble the Fleischer design, but you could still combine elements from both the cartoon and the comics to create your version.
>>146961582I hope Thunderbean makes their own Fleischer Superman Blu-ray set, so we don't have to use that shit version WB shat out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KgtASJPSrk&ab_channel=NotAnAnimationHistorian
>>147004605The Warner prints are fine, you're just being a brat.
>>147004659Maybe calling it "shit" is a bit harsh, but I'm not being a brat. These shorts deserve to be restored and presented in the best possible way, and the Warner Blu-ray set falls short of that.The set suffers from excessive use of DNR, which wipes out the film grain and, along with it, much of the fine detail. The colors are often incorrect—for instance, The Mechanical Monsters is overwhelmingly red. It also retains the old audio errors from previous DVD releases, errors that don’t even appear on public domain prints. To make matters worse, Warner somehow introduced new audio issues—there aren’t many, but it’s still ridiculous. And some shorts still have incorrect intros and outros.A better representation of these shorts can be found in the "Mild-Mannered Edition" on YouTube. All they did was piece together various versions of the shorts available on the Internet Archive, and the result is far more accurate and complete than Warner’s official release. I understand we’ll probably never get a truly perfect version of these shorts, but what Warner released, while not entirely unwatchable, is far from the best these could look and sound.
>>147004080what would horror tintin even be
Ok so basically we have new public domain works in like 50 years?
>>147004400From what I can tell, Japanese copyrights last 70 years after the author's death for individual works and 70 years after the publication date for corporate works. For Popeye, this means he likely entered the public domain in Japan either in 2008 or 1999, depending on how the work is classified. If what you said is true, Popeye went into the public domain in Japan in 2008, and the post-Segar strips would have come later.The Fleischer shorts, the first of these shorts would have entered the public domain in Japan in 2003. So by 2029, when the first Popeye short featuring his theme song enters the public domain in the U.S., all of the copyrighted assets in the video game will be in the public domain in most of the world. Meaning Nintendo can release the game with no problem. There is one roadblock. King Features could argue that the version of Popeye and the characters in the game reflects their 1960s interpretation, which remains copyrighted in the U.S. until 2056 and in Japan and many other countries until 2030.
>>147005744No something new enters the public domain at the start of every year.
>>147005799but wouldn't the entire controversy because disney keep increasing the public domain line?
>>147005746Gameplay is also generally not actionable on- there exist patents, of course, but it does seem like they're rarely acted on, as you can see by the amount of indie games that manage to be "here's old game, but new". So if nothing else, you could make your own Popeye game based on the Nintendo one AND using Public Domain Popeye materials.>>147005744Every Jan 1 there's something new in the public domain. In the USA, that's mostly stuff that is under work for hire copyright, meaning stuff that's made 95 years prior to that Jan 1; for the rest of the world, it'll generally be the entire works of whomever died either 70 or 50 years prior.
>>147005746Brutis is under the public domain due to Barbecue for Two not being properly copyrighted, also many of the "White Navy Uniform" Popeyes are also under the public domain as well.Nintendo will by fine by 2029.
>>147005821>>147005799No, I mean, that because disney keep extending the copyright, no new works have entered in like decades.
>>147005818They did that in the late 90s, together with music corporations and a lot of others. They have made no plays at that since, which is surprising a lot of people. They're not even using trademarks to bully people around. It does genuinely seem like they have someone smart in their legal department who said "we can't stop this from happening, so it'll be better PR if instead we compete with it". The strategy isn't "stop Mickey from being public domain", it's "show how the only good Mickey things come from us, that we're more genuine". Suddenly there's Chinese translations of Gottfredson comic strips, etc.>>147005831You're thinking of the aforementioned addition of 20 years to the work for hire copyright duration that happened in the late 90s, which meant that yes, throughout the 2000s and 2010s, basically, no new works entered the public domain in the US. However, those 20 years have since run out- there's been new works in the PD in the US for the past four or five years.
>>147005854what is funny is that hollywood and disney made themselves enemies of the republican party just in time to lose the copyright battle.
>>147005878Anon, there's no battle at all in the first place. There wasn't any attempt at further expanding the 95 years duration of work for hire copyright, at least nothing known publicly.
>>147005893no, I mean that disney would have fought but today climate is diferent becuase normies now care about fan art and the public domain.
>>147005939I can agree to that, but that's irrelevant to the republicans. I know you're referring to the whole spat with DeSantis, but by that point there already were works getting into the public domain again. Just lurk a bit more and don't come into things with the politics brain immediately, it leads you to misspeak.Go visit the Public Domain Super Heroes wiki, anyway, anon, and enjoy some of the works you'll find there. It's a good way to spend an evening
>>147005821>you could make your own Popeye game based on the Nintendo oneIt's funny that you said that because that shitty 2021 Popeye game we got was actually a 3-D remake.
>>147005979ok, I wanted to make a joke about disney.
>>147005998Which is a good concept! Just has to be done without it being absolute dogwater
>>146955804this has been the best thing I see people do with steamboat willy mickey mousehttps://store.steampowered.com/app/2416450/MOUSE_PI_For_Hire/
>>147005830Brutus will be fine globally, but the white Navy Popeye first appeared in The Mighty Navy in 1941. Japan already has access to it, but in the U.S., it won’t be available until 2037. The pipe toot at the start of the game is from the 1940s shorts. As for the other characters, they are all clearly the 1960s versions, and there's no doubt that King Features would bring that up in court.
whiffle hen
should I storytime Popeye's first story arc?
>>147006588Sure why not, you should make a thread.
>>147006588Thimble Theatre is genuinely a lot of fun, go for it
Popeye's village being named "Sweethaven" isn't a public domain thing yet. Any ideas on what could be a replacement name? I feel something either themed around "Thimble" or "Segar" would be nice
>>147006727Chester after Segar's hometown, which is covered in statues of the extended Popeye/Thimble Theater cast.
>>147006727>>147006798Why not simply create new twists to popeye instead of just copy pasting his lore.
>>147006809Odds are, in a new twist, if you want to call any attention to the background anyway, you're going to be having to name the location regardless.>>147006798I do actually like that, though it makes me wonder if something like "Chesterville" wouldn't sound more "cartoony location"
>>147006809I think the established status quo with characters this old becomes so ingrained that any deviation from it feels wrong and alien.
>>147006899could be interesting a new twist to popeye.like cyberpunk popeye.
>>146955735I think blue looks better on Mickey than red.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NszIeFh7YZk&ab_channel=CondorCreations
>>147006938I can go with that, but yellow or green is even better I think
>>146985844I have to say this. Ub Iwerks was a fantastic and brilliant animator, but as a director, no. He lacked a strong sense of humor, and most of his cartoon plots felt aimless. Because of that, I don't find his cartoons that funny. I'm also not the biggest fan of Flip the Frog and dislike his Looney Tunes shorts.The only shorts that l really like are Happy Days and The Skeleton Dance.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hCejrfiGdQ&ab_channel=CrazyToonWorld
>>147007284Green is more of a Oswald color.>>147007355Thanks for your opinion, he also used "Mort" in his short.
>>146985844Iwerks' estate has said it isn't, not that it matters much now, it'll be in just a couple years
>>147007355Iwerks only did 2 Looney Tunes shorts and thats a mistermeaner at best, Porky and Gabby was speared by Chuck Jones while Bob Clampett handled Porky's Super Service.Both Chuck and Bob were only credited as animators but it's clear that Ub had little if anything to do with them and only took screen credit for a pay check.
>>147006938Fixed.
>>147008150>Last year it entered public domain.>Decided to finally watch it.>Turns out Disney only uses the opening sequence.>Mickey isn't the helmsman.>he is just a lazyfuck who enjoys torturing animals.It is a form of gaslighting
>>147008441A bit, but it's been clarified every time it's been brought up, like in kingdom hearts.In the IRL and a meta sense, it's the first cartoon, so he needs to look good.https://youtu.be/6gcaR7nBJTc?si=1fA1nFjtMtqnWyOR&t=1705
Realising I like the name of "Thimble Town" for Popeye's town because it sounds like "Tinsel Town", too
>>146957300What else can YOU do about them?
>>146958556>The Questionhuh... so if someone wanted to do their own Ditko Question books they could? Or is that an issue of the trademark being a problem? Tho The Question seems generic enough.
>>146998311Murder being illegal in practice isn't a real thing.Checkmate, moralfags.
>>147003709>Warner Bros goes under>Disney tries to buy DC>as a giant fuck you they quietly have fine print that somehow finds a loophile where all the characters go into the public domainor, a tid bit more realisticly:>Warner Bros and DC are so incompetant that during their sale tobyer another company they somehow fuck up and trigger some obscure legal loophole that allows all their characters to enter the public domain>ironicly the only ones spared are the Charlton and Fawcett characters as well as Plastic Man which we thought were public domain, but somehow the DC versions remain owned by Warners
>>147005650That killer gorilla
>>147010772Disney is trying to buy ALL of Warner Media, not just DC, and they're in a bidding war with Rupert Murdoch to buy Warner Media right now.
>>147005650Schizo ginger travels the world and kills tourists or something
>>147005818They gave up because it was unsustainable, they realized its better off to invest money in new IPs rather than burn money on lobbying to push the can further down the road
Any other IP of note coming into public domain in 2026?
>>147010896Looks like Pluto, Betty Boop and Nancy Drew come into public domain by 2026
>>147010896Betty Boop is the big one next year, though that was when she was more of an anthropomorphic dog.
>>146992711isnt there a point in castle crashers you all fight for the princesses or something?
>>147010815He's a misunderstood good boy
>>146985846Then why not make the game with generic stand-ins, and once PD comes for the other characters, slot them in?
>>147010819Good, that way all of them will go bankrupt at the same time.
>>147001798The TRUE test of this will be in 2032 when Snow White becomes Public Domain; if Disney didn't extend the copyright for Steamboat Willie, then there's no chance they will for Snow White.
>>147010772>all of dc and marvel characters in existence go into PDoh sweet mother of god I would have so much fun watching the world all scramble to make comics of the characters. even ai art shit would come out in droves. it'd be absolutely lovely and chaos.
>>147011168The Disney version was shit to begin with, it's amazing how no other company or animator managed to craft a better adaptation of the fairy tale in all these years.
>>146957300How the heck is plastic man in public domain before Superman? Was he created before DC?
>>147011254>B-b-but the symbol of purity and innocence didn't execute the villain in a fucked up and completely out of character fashion!
>>147011019yeah, but I imagine the Popeye game could have a unique PVP segment for each stage instead of just a normal free for all every time.
>>147011296J.R.R Tolkien and C.S Lewis despised the Disney adaptation. If you take the darkness out of the fairy tale, it loses almost all of it's meaning.
>>147011168The real Snow white has been in public domain way before from Grimm's Fairy tales, so the disney version doesnt mean much
Has Disney been making live action adaptations as a way to enforce copyright protections on their IPs at least for live action
>>147011325The Disney Snow White's Haunted Forest inspired a shitload of Italian horror films and for decades, the film's primary representation at the Disney parks was "We're gonna have that Witch jumpscare children for three minutes before she tries crushing you with a boulder".At any rate, Tolkien's objections were more with the dwarfs themselves being corny singing comic relief, even though that's basically what he wrote Thorin and his company as for most of the Hobbit.
>>147011325>>147011327People have even pointed out that Grimm's versions tended to skew more horrific than other transcriptions of the oral tradition of fairy tales.When you think about it, they were the first public domain horror story makers.
>>147011340It doesn't work like that, even if they desperately wanted it to.
>>147011366I get that they cant exten copyright like that but they could try to make a play in courts that live action adaption of their IP which went public domain infringes on their own later live action adaptation which is still under copyright
>>147011340It's a mix of nostalgia bait and "The Chinese have no special attachment to our classic brands or 2D animation, we gotta give them their own versions". At most it'd help trademark protection.
>>146979436>The story was just three pages long, never published, and lacked copyright protectionNonsense. Copyright attached the instant it was written down.
>>147011378They would be fighting an uphill battle, particularly because the upcoming live action Snow White is already far removed from the animated original, both in tone and intent.
>>147011283No, he was created after. What happened was in the time that copyrights needed to be renewed, DC didn't renew them. After all it wasn't even their company's books, they bought Plastic Man from Quality Comics.
>>147011493The only thing Disney's concerned about protecting is their specific named versions of the Dwarfs. Like Grumpy alone is a huge money printer for them.
>>147011254Debunked.
>>147011340Not how it works. Again, their focus has been in brand competition- the point isn't to make a legal case by making a new Snow White, it's to make people associate "Snow White equals Disney". Think of food companies going "other stores may have the same food but ours is better and more authentic".
>>146957300What about Mary Marvel(ous milkers)?
>>147011876https://pdsh.fandom.com/wiki/Mary_Marvel
>>147011471>Copyright attached the instant it was written down.le sigh... Just because that's how it works now doesn't mean it has always been that way. At that time period you had attach the proper copyright statement & symbol within the first few pages in order to be properly copyrighted.
>>147011254Blocks your path.
>>147012016Not even close.
>>147011471That wasn't the case in 1939
>>147005650Tintin but evil
>>146981867You don't need to, just make something cool. Everyone is chasing easy billions instead of settling for less money but consistent feedback
>>147010673 As is, so much of internet culture is based around completely ignoring copyright law and until copyright law has adaptations for those parts of internet culture, the internet and society will continue to broadly ignore it. Street performance spider-men are shaking in their onesies.This picture…is a lustly and risqué provoking image meant to draw the class’s eyeballs as a demonstration.This is supposed to be an image of cammy white out of street fighter. The resemblance is so frayed as to unrecognizable. Do you think I’m due for a raid from the cap com police for this illegal distribution? No? What about every ‘owned’ character on this entire site. There’s a whole board for my little pony, that’s probably the better part of a lifetime of the book being thrown at ‘somebody’ if copyright was enforced. Copyright only practically exists when in the narrow example of somebody wanting it to cause a stink against another.
So if a character becomes public domain does that mean I can just use that specific version of the character that's PD, or does that give me free reign to also make my own interpretation of the character so long as I don't get into stuff that's still under copyright?IE: when Superman is PD do I have to use only the first comic version of Superman, or can I make Superman with my own characters and power inventions so long as they're original to me?
It doesn't matter. After WW3 bombs out most of the world nobody will care about IPs or Copyrights in the aftermath anymore. You can print whatever the fuck you want, assuming you can find any kind of intact distribution service.
>>147013026>IE: when Superman is PD do I have to use only the first comic version of Superman, or can I make Superman with my own characters and power inventions so long as they're original to me?BothYou're using the first comic version of Superman but you can bring in your own characters/power inventions so long as they aren't derived from copyrighted DC stuff
>>147013026Thats what I want to know. I have a PD character im dabbling with for fun with ai art and im curious if im allowed to take the OG version and give them magic and flight and not get in some trouble or something
>>147013073Can I create my own version of Superman that's neither like the first comic or any of the DC stuff. Is the general concept of Superman now PD?
>>147010625>so if someone wanted to do their own Ditko Question books they could?Yep. You just can’t use any elements of the modern version of The Question, like the updated color scheme or origin story. Trademarks shouldn’t be an issue, though.>>147007398Thunderbean managed to produce that Blu-ray set without any issues, and all his cartoons are available on YouTube, so it seems clear he's in the public domain. Why are estates so overly protective of intellectual property that has largely lost its cultural relevance and respect? If someone were to use such material in an unflattering way, it’s unlikely to harm its legacy. Most estates don’t even try to expand on the legacy—they just hold onto the intellectual property, profiting from existing works without contributing anything new. How much money could Flip the Frog possibly generate to justify them being so protective and unwilling to let others use the character?
>>147011501DC bought so many characters that they couldn’t keep track of them all. For example, the only reason Elongated Man exists is because a writer wanted to use Plastic Man in a story, and wasn’t sure if DC owned the rights. As a result, they created Elongated Man as a stand-in.
>>147011471For works created but not published before January 1, 1978, copyright lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. If the author is unknown or the work is made for hire, the protection lasts 120 years from the date of creation.Since Seymour Reit passed away in 2001, that short story would enter the public domain in 2071. Harvey Publications Inc. might use this as a point of argument. But I would say that it’s practically impossible to infringe on any copyright it might have. You can’t illegally copy something you couldn’t possibly have had access to. I’d argue that it’s more of a prototype for the real Casper than a definitive work.I will also say I'm not a lawyer.
>>146963868All sand nigger belong in concentration camps
Found this on Reddit.
>>147013640Unfind it and go back.
>>147011168They might for Snow White because they have no trademark outside the very specific name "Walt Disney's Snow White and the Seven Dwarves", they can't trademark the name and design like Mickey and he's had many designs outside his PD contentThat's the test because they will almost entirely lose rights to the film and characters
>>146991811
>>147006182I'm pretty certain this was announced complete with gameplay footage before MM hit the public domain.
>>147013640>Reddit has already done more with the public domain characters then 4chan has
>>147013764Good, can't stand these shitty corpos that troll people despite their slop being public domain and rightfully free to use. It's not enough they lobbied on two occasions to extend copyright terms far past the rational limit.
>>146957300I thought Komo appeared later than Betty Boop who still isn't in the public domain. What gives?
>>147014146Wait, does that mean Popeye's likeness in that universe is in the public domain?
>>147014692Koko's first appeared in the Out of the Inkwell series in 1918, and Betty Boop first appeared in 1930. That actually makes him one year older than Felix the Cat.
>>147011325>>147011362>>147011363That was proven fake decades ago.
>>147014146Last year this guy also started a strip about public domain mickey, so he's just poking fun at being in the unique position of being "the official popeye artist" when this happened
>>147013077At that point, why not just make an OC?
>>147015876Because Superman clones are a dime-a-dozen, and people would rather work with the real thing?.
>>147015896Yeah but if you're making a story with Superman, you'd want to actually integrate something to do with the character.A Superman that is "neither like the first comic or any of the DC stuff" will end up being another Superman clone that just happens to have the official name on top.
>>147015947Sometimes it's nice to have the official name
What is your favorite Public Domain?
>>147016352I can’t imagine a world where Dracula, Frankenstein, or Cthulhu isn’t in the public domain. I think our culture would be knee-capped if they weren't
>>147016460Not to mention Night of the Living Dead. Think of all the countless zombie films and TV series that just wouldn't exist. And that film being public domain was due to a filing error, that one mistake led to tons of classic films being made. Fucking Disney wouldn't exist without the public domain, yet they are it's biggest enemies.
>>147016352I've thoroughly enjoyed all of Doyle's Holmes stuff (well, nearly all. Still complaining about the one where a guy's injecting monkey glans into himself to become an ape man), so giving him the win. Dracula's a great novel, too. And I'm a fan of Sun Wukong and most Journey to the West interpretations
you should get 50 years from publication and that's itwhat's the point of 95 years when the average human lifespan is several decades short of that, and most people arent producing shit the first 2 decades of their lifeit's basically set up now to guarantee that children AND grandchildren can just coast without contributing
Here’s something crazy to think about: Walt Disney’s likeness will enter the public domain in 2036. This means you’ll be able to include Walt in your work without needing to make him a parody. He can look, act, and sound just like the real thing—no approval from his estate required, and no risk of getting sued by them.
>>147017709I’d argue that 50 years is still too long for corporate works—it should be much shorter, like 15 to 20 years. Take Mario, for example. By the time he was 30 years old, he was already a household name with hundreds of games to his credit. Even at 15, with the N64 era underway, Mario was well-established and bringing in massive profits for Nintendo. Losing his copyright in 1996 wouldn’t have stopped Nintendo from making new Mario games, and most of his library wouldn’t even be in the public domain—just the original Donkey Kong.
>>147017709>>147017945I love a good chaos storm and think it should be 10 years and only extended 5 years. im sick of all the cool shit being locked away. if you cant make your millions in 15 years than it just wasnt ment to be. but this is a bit to much of a chaos storm for most people to think is a good idea.
>>147017713A more crazy thing is that brave new world will enter public domain
>>147018073Nintendo hasn’t made an F-Zero game since 2004 (and I’m not counting F-Zero 99). If the series were in the public domain by now, we’d probably have plenty of spiritual successors that actually use the original characters. Hell, if Nintendo knew they were about to lose the copyright, it might light a fire under their ass to shit out one or two new games before the rights slipped away.
Is that bump limit?
>>147018250and thats my point. there's tons of great amazing games and characters rotting in the 70s 80s 90s 2000s and if people could have full access to all of it we might be seeing some kickass stuff going on with it. same with movies and music. 10 years and 5 added and now everyone can enjoy it. books, movies, shows, music, anything media, hell throw in car patents while we're at it gimme my public domain 1969 dodge charger dammit. just yeah make it all 15 total years so the world can keep enjoying things. to much shit gets left to rot and die because and a large part imo is because of these bs laws we deal with
>>147018278I think, but good thread overall.
>>147013242They could try to use that as argument but I don't think it would work because Casper's first published work is the 1945 cartoon. If they found The Friendly Ghost and published it now, what that would give them is a book that they have a long copyright on
>>147018369>gimme my public domain 1969 dodge charger dammit.Wait don't patent terms last way shorter than copyright terms?
>>147018412they do but its possible to keep them going with a bunch of bs shit. more law bs. either way it all needs to be taken to 15 years total and the world would be better for it honestly.
>>147018412patents are 20 years
>>147018387It wasn't as crazy as last year
>>147018577Well, last year was all hype about Mickey getting in and nothing is topping that.
>>147018865Superman will also be really hype, Batman too.
Good thread, /co/ always manages to have a nice PD thread every year.
>>147018577>>147018865It's mainly because Mickey was the big name as of last year; there's a lot of interesting stuff that went PD this year but you'd have to look into it
