Active Users:312 Time:16/05/2024 10:26:33 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Works published between 1923 and 1978 are different Larry Send a noteboard - 04/01/2012 10:25:16 PM
Those are 95 years after initial publication or in some cases, copyright renewal, which makes it several more decades for those works (usually 2030-2048). The change in US law was done largely to protect Walt Disney's works from falling into public domain, as that would devastate the corporation he founded.
Illusions fall like the husk of a fruit, one after another, and the fruit is experience. - Narrator, Sylvie

Je suis méchant.
Reply to message
Why Johnny Can't Read Any New Public Domain Books In The US: Because Nothing New Entered The P.D. Great Lord of Chaos - 03/01/2012 11:33:34 PM 1751 Views
I find it difficult to see this as stealing rights from the public. Rebekah - 04/01/2012 11:15:35 AM 888 Views
Are you arguing for illegal use of legally protected works? Aeryn - 04/01/2012 09:34:18 PM 816 Views
No. I'm saying that keeping works in copyright doesn't stop them from being read, watched, etc. Rebekah - 04/01/2012 10:24:50 PM 821 Views
That's not the point, though. Macharius - 05/01/2012 01:05:17 PM 872 Views
???? random thoughts - 05/01/2012 03:22:58 PM 842 Views
Re: ???? Macharius - 05/01/2012 04:04:21 PM 872 Views
That isn't inspiration that wanting to use the popularity of the original to promote your work random thoughts - 05/01/2012 05:04:25 PM 849 Views
not to mention public libraries *NM* random thoughts - 05/01/2012 03:21:04 PM 478 Views
Blame Disney. *NM* Vivien - 04/01/2012 05:48:00 PM 615 Views
I don't get it. Palatine - 04/01/2012 05:51:19 PM 1106 Views
You know those Jane Austen parodies? Only because Jane Austen is in the public domain. Aeryn - 04/01/2012 09:32:20 PM 915 Views
Parody is actually covered by the legal definition of fair use so doesn't break copyright. Rebekah - 04/01/2012 10:28:08 PM 892 Views
I'm fairly sure the Jane Austen parodies do in fact use actual paragraphs... no? *NM* Legolas - 04/01/2012 10:31:32 PM 478 Views
The zombies one doesn't precisely. It's somewhat modernised. I've not read the others. Rebekah - 04/01/2012 10:32:59 PM 827 Views
Precisely the point. Vivien - 04/01/2012 10:45:01 PM 823 Views
Yes, they take tons of text from actual books. Contrast this with Ms. Rowling's reaction. *NM* Aeryn - 05/01/2012 07:01:46 PM 388 Views
If there's zero chance of needing a lawyer at some point, it's way more likely to actually happen. Vivien - 04/01/2012 10:43:23 PM 915 Views
Regarding quotes or poem lines, they ask permission for those. Legolas - 05/01/2012 07:48:08 PM 770 Views
Answering you specifically Palatine - 05/01/2012 04:57:33 PM 850 Views
But that doesn't make sense. Aeryn - 05/01/2012 07:18:08 PM 997 Views
Here's the gist of it. Palatine - 06/01/2012 04:18:29 PM 846 Views
Patents and copyrights aren't meant to last forever (shouldn't, anyway) Vivien - 04/01/2012 10:33:30 PM 879 Views
I know they aren't. I don't necessarily agree that they shouldn't though. Palatine - 05/01/2012 05:01:05 PM 792 Views
Copyrights stifle creativity. Aeryn - 05/01/2012 07:48:08 PM 876 Views
Re: Copyrights stifle creativity. Palatine - 06/01/2012 04:39:24 PM 1268 Views
Re: I know they aren't. I don't necessarily agree that they shouldn't though. Vivien - 06/01/2012 12:47:50 AM 805 Views
Why. Palatine - 06/01/2012 05:05:20 PM 1418 Views
That is a very confusing article. Legolas - 04/01/2012 10:19:22 PM 930 Views
Works published between 1923 and 1978 are different Larry - 04/01/2012 10:25:16 PM 869 Views
Do you think it is right that Disney can protect its movies? random thoughts - 05/01/2012 05:29:08 PM 815 Views
Ok, what has movies Disney done lately that were on par with its classics? *NM* Aeryn - 05/01/2012 07:44:20 PM 368 Views
And speaking of Disney's classics... ranagrande - 05/01/2012 10:06:16 PM 960 Views
Until Disney discovered and copyrighted them, they obviouslty didn't exist. *NM* Vivien - 06/01/2012 12:58:55 AM 404 Views
Except of course they haven't copyrighted them... DomA - 06/01/2012 01:53:01 AM 799 Views
nice theory but you can make a Little Mermaid movie if you want random thoughts - 06/01/2012 02:48:47 PM 843 Views
OK why is that even a point of argument? random thoughts - 06/01/2012 02:42:47 PM 813 Views
No incentive to make great new works if they can just keep re-releasing Lion King in 3D *NM* Aeryn - 06/01/2012 09:45:38 PM 446 Views
I'm a lot older than your five year old, but I'm not sure I disagree Tangled is better. Legolas - 06/01/2012 11:12:32 PM 871 Views
Well, if corporations are now people, then maybe their copyright could be different? *shrug* Larry - 05/01/2012 07:57:38 PM 967 Views
Do you really want corporations to be immortal? Vivien - 06/01/2012 12:50:11 AM 868 Views
In a sense, aren't they already? Larry - 06/01/2012 02:42:53 AM 961 Views
Re: Well, if corporations are now people, then maybe their copyright could be different? *shrug* DomA - 06/01/2012 01:18:04 AM 863 Views
It's a thorny issue and I largely agree with you Larry - 06/01/2012 02:50:24 AM 896 Views
Huh... apparently, Mickey Mouse is already Public Domain anyway ranagrande - 06/01/2012 07:30:36 AM 1036 Views
Can you back that up? Vivien - 06/01/2012 04:17:35 AM 986 Views
Re: Can you back that up? DomA - 06/01/2012 06:02:01 PM 786 Views
Artist/Singers used to *always* be on tour in order to make a living. Vivien - 06/01/2012 09:34:44 PM 1068 Views
Re: the piracy issues ranagrande - 06/01/2012 06:30:46 AM 971 Views
Book piracy Vivien - 06/01/2012 05:21:40 PM 1075 Views
corporations have always had rights random thoughts - 06/01/2012 04:08:12 PM 837 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes