Marvel, DC, and the Public Domain

As this retard brought up, however incorrect he may be, its an interesting point.

While it wont happen SOON, for a lot of Sup Forums related characters (ESPECIALLY DC properties), who's creators are long since deceased (Bill Finger & Bob Kane, Siegel & Shuster, etc.) will, at some point in our some of our lifetimes (hopefully, anyway), fall into the public domain per US copyright law.

Lets use Batman and Superman as two examples:

Bob Kane died: Nov 3rd, 1998
Bill Finger died: Jan 18th, 1974

Jerry Siegel died: Jan. 28th, 1996
Joe Shuster died: July 30th, 1992

Now, im a little fuzzy on how it works with multiple creators for a single property that are credited as such, but lets remove Finger and Shuster from the equation and go for the later deaths that matter, Siegel and Kane.

Current copyright laws mean that after a 75 year period post-creator death, the creation will fall into the public domain and be free to use by anyone, meaning that the dates in which Batman and Superman, under the current laws, will become public domain would be as follows:

Bob Kane died: Nov 3rd, 1998
- Batman PD Date: Nov 3rd, 2073

Jerry Siegel died: Jan. 28th, 1996
- Superman PD Date: Jan 28th, 2071

So while its still quite a ways away, that still means in 55 years, Superman will become free for any Joe to draw, and 57 for any Bill to Bat.

Obviously, since Stan Lee is still kicking, all of his co-creations will fall into the public domain sometime in the 2090's or so. The ones where the other party is dead by now, anyway. So Marvels a little more safe in that regard.

What are they going to do Sup Forums? What CAN they do?

Also related: List the Sup Forums characters you most look forward to falling into the public domain at some point within the next 30 years.

There's really nothing they could do that they couldn't already do now with a parody character.

marvel is safe because stan lee is an immortal vampire

Except the part where DC/Marvel own the copyrights not the creators per the contracts they all signed in order to get published...

is that really how it works? wouldnt that have been the case with Mickey Mouse?

I could go look it up but i like the discourse.

It's how it works unless you already sold the copyright to someone else.

Which is exactly what happened in 99% of the properties Marvel and DC published.

>Except the part where DC/Marvel own the copyrights not the creators per the contracts they all signed in order to get published...
Thats not how that works you fucking idiot.

They may own the copyright but the law still works based around who created them. Otherwise why the fuck do you think theres a 75 year waiting period after their death? Do you think spooky scary skellingtons can pop out of the spook-o-sphere and spook you silly with lawspooks?

No. Their estates then own the copyright for another 75 years. Its the same with companies.

it can be hard to tell sometimes copyright law is a mess it needs fixing but i fear any attempts at doing so would be fucked up by people trying to just get rid of copyright

im not really sure what the details with supes are

going by your logic, jesus is owned by the catholic church and can sue me if i use him in a comic book. you fucking dipnugget

Could you pick an even more retarded example to try and make a point? Like really that was the best you could come up with? Something so idiotic it barely even relates?

oh yeah i forgot he was actually a dude, lemme fix that then.

going by your logic, ZEUS is owned by Greece and they can sue me for using him in a comic.

>Do you think spooky scary skellingtons can pop out of the spook-o-sphere and spook you silly with lawspooks?
Yes. It's my greatest fear. Fuck you for triggering me, faggot

Estates own the property for as long as they do not decide to renew the copyright. In 75 years Disney and Time Warner are just going to have to go to a court house and renew the current copyright likely paying a larger fee depending on the property.

This is also completely ignoring the relatively new phenomena of long standing franchises within culture and how current copyright law is likely to see several overhauls spearheaded by Disney.

What you really thought Micky Mouse might ever going into the public domain? And you want to call me an idiot? Nah kid, fuck off.

He would be had the hippy who got high and decided to create a mary sue asshole had some legal system in which to protect and profit off his creations.

You own a property for as long as you can pay a government to defend your declaration of ownership. Welcome to Capitalism.

>In 75 years Disney and Time Warner are just going to have to go to a court house and renew the current copyright likely paying a larger fee depending on the property.
Once time runs out on the copyright its gone. They can't just go and renew it. That's why Disney went so far as to have the laws changed to extend time things exist under copyright what twice now?

>Once time runs out on the copyright its gone.

>That's why Disney went so far as to have the laws changed to extend time things exist under copyright what twice now?

I think you answered your own question asshole.

No you fucking dipshit, theres a reason these massive companies like Time Warner and Disney had to fight and claw tooth and nail to have the 75 years added post creator death in the 70's when the Government was completely restructuring copyright laws.

Its tied to the creator, NOT the owner.

You're thinking of trademarks, which can be renewed by consistent usage of it.

>Also related: List the Sup Forums characters you most look forward to falling into the public domain at some point within the next 30 years.

I can't think of any that would fall into the public domain within the next 30 years, unless you count the ones that have debated legal status on Digital Comic Museum or whatever. Assuming the 75 year period holds then Hawkman and Wesley Dodds isn't in the public domain until 2061 because Gardner Fox died in 1986. And no one seems to know exactly when the creators of the Golden Age Atom passed away.

You made it sound like they just go and pay a fee like having your license renewed or something .

>I think you answered your own question asshole.

Do you really think that they're actually going to manage convincing the government to completely restructure the copyright system AGAIN after the 70's? Do you think that was even remotely easy for them?

Fucks sake dude, its a different world now, over 40 years, you cant do that again. We have the internet, social media, big players on either end of the issue, it was a once in a lifetime event.

>>That's why Disney went so far as to have the laws changed to extend time things exist under copyright what twice now?
>I think you answered your own question asshole.
the only reason it happened to begin with was the government agreed the current system at the time was a disaster. Along with the 75 years it comes with, it also means whatever you create automatically belongs to you unless prior consent is given to give somebody else the copyright, why the fuck would DISNEY approve of that part? Because it wasnt THEIR CALL. They cant just change laws on a whim, it was a perfect storm that led to that change.

yeah he did make it sound like that

considering how bad the current laws are i shudder to think how they could have ever been worse

In simplistic terms yes, minus the years of litigation, paperwork, teams of lawyers and millions of dollars.

They did it once, they will do it again. I don't think you quite understand how much fucking impact Disney has already had on the system. Getting that 70 year extension was remarkable in itself and they pulled it off. You want to make a case on modernity being the sole deterrence against a billion dollar company retaining the rights of their priceless icon? You mean the society that has made it even easier to go behind closed doors to push through legislation in the back pages of pointless laws and does not give a fuck about anything past it's 15 minutes of fame on the web?

Dude, fuck off with this shit.

>In simplistic terms yes, minus the years of litigation, paperwork, teams of lawyers and millions of dollars.
That's way too oversimplified and it misrepresents the entire situation.

You're right. It's much more likely that the thousands of lawyers on retainer at Disney are just waiting around watching the countdown to 2024 when they're out of a job once they lose the Mouse.

The situation was already misrepresented when faggot OP entertained the notion that these billion dollar franchises are just going to let their most profitable icons slip away without any say, thought, or action.

It is that simple though. Disney says "we're keeping the mouse" and eventually the law tells them "ok".

Trademarks are different, Mickey Mouse's silhouette has become a trademark of Disney, so thats no worry, its complex. The idea of Mickey will become public, but certain aspects wont.

>What you really thought Micky Mouse might ever going into the public domain?

There's currently an international treaty that limits copyright to 100 years. (It's 96 in the US.)

The United States could extend its copyright to 150 years... but that would only apply within our borders. Mickey would still be PD in France, Britain, etc.
To extend copyright Disney would actually have to RENEGOTIATE AN INTERNATIONAL TREATY. I'm not saying they can't pull it off -- they can -- but it's a bigger deal that getting Al Franken to bribe congressmen again.

Supposedly part of the reason Disney has been on a buying spree of late is because they want to have new exploitable properties if the old Disney stable goes PD.

You're naïve about copyright law.

The main argument that congress uses for extending copyrights literally forever is they "don't want people to be able to make porn of mickey mouse". That argument will ALWAYS hold up in court. Meaning if it isn't public domain NOW then it will NEVER be.

In that regard, Superman is a TM, as is likely Batman (that one I'm not 100% sure about and can't be fussed to check right this second). Likely so are other things.

There likely will be some copy right law changes given the fact that intellectual property as a whole is vastly different, far more valuable in an age where we are not buying 'things' but experiences and ideas.

Huge corporations are always going to try for any advantage and you can be certain that large rights holders like Warners and Disney as well as other IP rights holders like software companies (Microsoft, Apple, Google, etc.) will also try to push to extend whatever will financially benefit them.

but porn is legally protected as parody anyway

>In simplistic terms yes, minus the years of litigation, paperwork, teams of lawyers and millions of dollars.
and dont forget ultimate failure

they pulled it off once its not going to happen again

What's the deal with Peter Pan, isn't that a special arrangement with an orphanage or hospital?

There is literally nothing wrong with copyrights.

>Superman will become free for any Joe to draw, and 57 for any Bill to Bat.
They technically already are, fan work can only be slapped down if someone tries to profit from it or it draws negative publicity. Any Joe or Bill or Mark Millar is free to write about them right now.

People are just focusing on some "official" allowance to make Bomb Queen vs Superman or something.
Though, again, it will be no worse or better then than now. In fact looking at how most Superman expies are utilized, let alone how the official fanboys use him once they're given permission, I don't see a significant difference come an approved palette swap release.

>Inb4 But DC will have lost Superman!
Not really, public domain means they can use him too.

Its actually 95 years after publication release as per the latest amendments to the copyright laws

So technically Superman would fall in public domain in June 1938 + 95 years = June 2033

Similarly Batman (May 1939) would be May 2034

But remember only the content released up to that date would fall in Public Domain. So you wouldnt get a flying Superman or all of the Batman villain gallery. If you want any of the stories/traits/related characters to be public domain you have to wait 95 years after they were first published

This happened with Sherlock Holmes too were some of the published stories did not expire its copyright term so people had to wait it out to fall in public domain to make anything with them for free

>Not really, public domain means they can use him too.

Or specifically, if Superman were in public domain it means people would only be able to use the guy who can't fly and was slightly vulnerable, as said. DC would still own the Silver/Bronze version so they'd be pushing those aspects.

I think they have to wait it out till the year end rather than month

Hence it would be 1st January 2034 for superman and 1st January 2035 for Batman if I am not mistaken

as long as lawyers exist, laws are just a formality

>al franken
i love how he just openly stole the election and nobody cared. the other guy just eventually gave up, as if to say 'fuck this entire category of life'

only in the UK, everyone else he's pubic domain

Oh wow, i was mistaken then.

So, shit, does that mean we could totally revive Superman Lives but with some detail tweaks? It WAS essentially a tweaked up version of the 1938 Superman after all.

>So, shit, does that mean we could totally revive Superman Lives

You would have to make the version of Superman which is in Public Domain and likely an OC villain cause all the good Superman villains are several decades away from being Public Domain

Yeah thats what i said, Superman Lives.

Yeah, you'd have to replace Luthor (unless you're willing to wait another two years after for Luthor to be in public domain) and Braniac (who wouldn't be public domain until 20 years after).

You do realize that Disney will just lobby to have the copyright laws extended once they come close to expiring, right? There's no way they'll ever let Mickey Mouse, Captain America, or anything else they own whose original creators are dead enter the public domain.

it doesn't matter, since Mickey Mouse was created before Superman et al, and Disney will lobby to get the term extended again and again every time the mouse threatens to enter the public domain.
It's happened before, it will happen again.

Literally nuh muh.

Does the copyright expiration apply to every version of the character, or just to a single author's work?
When this issue came up in the 90s, DC just created Electric Superman to get around it, though of course in hindsight they ended up keeping the rights.