Public works to enter public domain.

[Green Lantern wannabe]

These include works by Robert Frost and Winston Churchill. Apparently, Mickey Mouse is set to enter public domain in 2024, and I think Batman shortly thereafter.

I would love to retell the story of the Dark Knight.

[jetengine]

These include works by Robert Frost and Winston Churchill. Apparently, Mickey Mouse is set to enter public domain in 2024, and I think Batman shortly thereafter.

I would love to retell the story of the Dark Knight.

Yeah those last two aint happening.

[Handsome men don't lose fights]

Yeah those last two aint happening.

They should. The fact that they won't is a G.D. act of corporate piracy. Remember, if a kid downloads a bit torrent of a song, he's a contributer towards societal decay and should be prosecuted for theft, but if a mega corp gets to ignore the law of the land with impunity, that's just good business.

[MRP]

Just because the copyrights end and a work goes into the public domain doesn't mean companies don't still own the trademarks. Lots of the Tarzan works by Edgar Rice Burroughs are public domain, so anyone can publish those works, but they can't use Tarzan in the title or the marketing because those are still trademarked. And if you produce new works base don the public domain, you can't use anything that is still trademarked. Trademarks don't expire as long as the owner continues to show use and protects them, and public domain has no bearing on trademarks at all, only copyrights.

As an example, when Dynamite produced new Tarzan stories based on the original novel being in the public domain back in 2012 or so, they had to call the book Lord of the Jungle and couldn't call it Tarzan, and even in doing so ended up having to settle a trademark violation suit ERB's rights holders filed against them. A lot of people don't understand the differences between copyright and trademarks and believe public domain means something it actually doesn't, and wind up getting into a lot of legal and financial trouble because of it.

Some stuff that enters the public domain never had trademarks or the trademarks expired because of lack of use (such as some of the stuff done with Project Superpowers), but if the trademarks are still in use and protected by a rights holder, what you can do with something in the public domain is severely limited.

-M

[Handsome men don't lose fights]

Just because the copyrights end and a work goes into the public domain doesn't mean companies don't still own the trademarks. Lots of the Tarzan works by Edgar Rice Burroughs are public domain, so anyone can publish those works, but they can't use Tarzan in the title or the marketing because those are still trademarked. And if you produce new works base don the public domain, you can't use anything that is still trademarked. Trademarks don't expire as long as the owner continues to show use and protects them, and public domain has no bearing on trademarks at all, only copyrights.

As an example, when Dynamite produced new Tarzan stories based on the original novel being in the public domain back in 2012 or so, they had to call the book Lord of the Jungle and couldn't call it Tarzan, and even in doing so ended up having to settle a trademark violation suit ERB's rights holders filed against them. A lot of people don't understand the differences between copyright and trademarks and believe public domain means something it actually doesn't, and wind up getting into a lot of legal and financial trouble because of it.

Some stuff that enters the public domain never had trademarks or the trademarks expired because of lack of use (such as some of the stuff done with Project Superpowers), but if the trademarks are still in use and protected by a rights holder, what you can do with something in the public domain is severely limited.

-M

TLDR, trademarks are currently being used as a bad faith work-around for copyright expiration, abetted by paid for lawmakers who refuse to allow the issue to be challenged in court, where it would be crushed like an egg shell.

[Duskman]

Do you actually want five billion unprofessional Batman fan fic stories exploding onto the market place until the character becomes a smear of pop-culture turd? Because that's what's going to happen every year as soon as popular characters on that level become public domain and free of trademark restrictions.

[The Darknight Detective]

Do you actually want five billion unprofessional Batman fan fic stories exploding onto the market place until the character becomes a smear of pop-culture turd? Because that's what's going to happen every year as soon as popular characters on that level become public domain and free of trademark restrictions.

Saints preserve us!

[Green Lantern wannabe]

That hasn't happened to Sherlock Holmes, so why would it happen to Batman? I'm confident Bruce Wayne can survive entering the public domain.

[Kieran_Frost]

Odd question (and I ask for a friend): I "might" have heard of the Batman and Marvel gay porn films. How did they get round the trademark???

TLDR, trademarks are currently being used as a bad faith work-around for copyright expiration, abetted by paid for lawmakers who refuse to allow the issue to be challenged in court, where it would be crushed like an egg shell.

PREACH! It's a flagrant disregard for the core spirit behind the rule. This should be squashed!

Do you actually want five billion unprofessional Batman fan fic stories exploding onto the market place until the character becomes a smear of pop-culture turd? Because that's what's going to happen every year as soon as popular characters on that level become public domain and free of trademark restrictions.

Ooh that won't happen, and even if it does, THAT'S. LIFE. Why should Batman be immune from the reality of society's rules? Beside, Robin Hood and King Arthur can be redone as much as people like, it's not ruined the popularity of those characters.

[Tuck]

Do you actually want five billion unprofessional Batman fan fic stories exploding onto the market place until the character becomes a smear of pop-culture turd? Because that's what's going to happen every year as soon as popular characters on that level become public domain and free of trademark restrictions.

It's not just about letting other people try to write Batman (although forcing DC to compete for fan dollars wouldn't be the worst thing in the world), there's also the fact that movies and television have to decide whether to cut a deal and pay for the rights to so much as show a Batman comic or to make up a fake comic. It may not be a huge deal, but sometimes that authenticity can make the difference. (The streaming version of the Wonder Years was butchered due to the inability to renegotiate all the music rights for streaming and home video.)

[Gray Lensman]

Odd question (and I ask for a friend): I "might" have heard of the Batman and Marvel gay porn films. How did they get round the trademark???

In the US, parody is protected by force of law. Sue someone for a parody, and very often you get to pay two sets of lawyers after the case is thrown out. Possibly with a SLAP escalator attached, or the judge ruling that the defense lawyers get to bill the plaintiff at full cost despite having taken the case Pro Bono.

Additionally, things that are part of the public consciousness have slightly less protection because of it - you can have people in a film talking about Star Wars or using it to explain certain concepts without having to pay to do so.

[Gray Lensman]

Do you actually want five billion unprofessional Batman fan fic stories exploding onto the market place until the character becomes a smear of pop-culture turd? Because that's what's going to happen every year as soon as popular characters on that level become public domain and free of trademark restrictions.

Read the fan fiction story Fire Birds, then compare it to Avengers vs X-Men and tell me which one is better.

[Iron Maiden]

Do you actually want five billion unprofessional Batman fan fic stories exploding onto the market place until the character becomes a smear of pop-culture turd? Because that's what's going to happen every year as soon as popular characters on that level become public domain and free of trademark restrictions.

I'm fine with the granting of trademark restrictions, etc. IMO the companies like Disney have also invested in these properties so they deserve to keep them. No one should get them for free. If you want them, you should have to pay for them.

[MRP]

I'm fine with the granting of trademark restrictions, etc. IMO the companies like Disney have also invested in these properties so they deserve to keep them. No one should get them for free. If you want them, you should have to pay for them.

Or create something original yourself that resonates with the audience enough to be a force in the marketplace rather than acting like the very corporations you criticize for trying to cash in on someone else's creativity.


-M

[Tuck]

Or create something original yourself that resonates with the audience enough to be a force in the marketplace rather than acting like the very corporations you criticize for trying to cash in on someone else's creativity.


-M

Disney likely wouldn't be what it is today without massive exploitation of public domain. It's the bulk of its movie catalog.


The purpose of copyright is to foster cultural expansion. The idea is to incentivize creative works, but it's supposed to expire because culture is always in conversation with itself. It's a temporary monopoly, just like a patent. (Of course, if we expanded patent terms to the extent we have with copyright, the world would grind to a halt.)