FUN FACT: The last Zorro story published before the closing of the public domain saw him fighting Barbatos

FUN FACT: The last Zorro story published before the closing of the public domain saw him fighting Barbatos.

Wait, is Zorro in the public domain?

>before the closing of the public domain
What the hell does that mean? He suddenly became not-public domain?

Jesus, just how powerful are the jews in Hollywood?

I think what he means is later stories were copyrighted and maintained the copyright

>literally control everything the media and the news put out
Very.

Zorro somehow beats the Dark Knights pls.

The public domain got extended to 96 years. Batman should have been public domain decades ago. We are FINALLY going to see creations from 1923 entering the public domain in a few years; we caught up to the extension.
And due to international treaty the US can't extend it more than another 4 years anyway.

Yes. Only some of his earliest adventures.

Disney will bribe the entire planet if they have to.

that would be the the only thing to get me to read some Snyder trash

What year was this??

You got any source on that, buddy ?

Since OP correctly assumed most of Sup Forums would be stupid enough to buy it at face value I did some digging for those who actually want to know better if this checks out.
After The Curse of Capistrano (the first Zorro novel) was published and consequently was turned into The Mark of Zorro movie, Johnston McCulley wrote more Zorro novels to fuel public demand. The 2nd one was The Further Adventures of Zorro.
In that story, Zorro fights pirates, and the captain of the pirates was named Barbados. He was not the main villain of the story (he even teams up with Zorro at the end), and there's no relation between him and the Bat creature.
And this wasn't the "last story before the closing of the public domain", since Zorro didn't enter public domain until decades later and The Further Adventures of Zorro is one of the few stories that is under public domain.

OP was just reaching really hard and probably wasn't even aware of the existence of this character.

Barbatos

>In that story, Zorro fights pirates, and the captain of the pirates was named Barbados. He was not the main villain of the story (he even teams up with Zorro at the end), and there's no relation between him and the Bat creature.

AH HA

Disney has been making new characters and only doing Micky in merch and games.

Everything eventually goes public domain copyright wise. Trademarks just need to be renewed like logos, icons, names.

Will we ever see Barbatos (female) again?

I'm still unsure what it all entails when things enter public domains. Let's use Batman as the example of it. If Batman were to fall into public domain, does that mean that older Batman stories could be republished or recreated, so long as year-over-year they slip into the public domain timeline? Could you make new Batman stories entirely using first appearance Batman and publish them so long as they don't infringe upon other tertiary elements of Batman (i.e. Jason Todd, Damian Wayne) that are still held under copyright? Could you make T-shirts and posters that feature the cover of Detective Comics #27?

>Everything eventually goes public domain copyright wise.
Unless you belong to Disney.

I'm not a chick nor a gay nigga and I know I could do my nails better then this bitch. That is is just terrible.

bump

Not until someone bats cleanup in 10 years and reveals that Books of Magic Bartbatos is the same as Morrison Barbatos.

Italians in Cali don't care desu. Slobby.

It gets really weird when you mix in the international laws. For example Conan is public domain outside of the US, but not in it.

> He was not the main villain of the story (he even teams up with Zorro at the end)
Is that how metal is going to end?

Barbatos looks like a pretty cool dude.

Not sure why they chose to link him to the Batman lore though.

if something is in the Public domain than that can be used freely, as long as you don't copy aspects that aren't under copyright still(like when Superman becomes public domain initially only the stuff in Action Comics #1 will be PD, stuff like Kryptonite will remain copyrighted for a while longer), also Tradmarks don't quite expire in the same way, so even once Mickey Mouse is Public Domain, Disney's control over the Trademarks for him mean that trying to advertise anything involving him that isn't sanctioned by Disney would be suicide(same reason why Burroughs's estate still has a lot of control over the concept of Tarzan, while a bunch of the books are PD, they still hold valid Trademarks over him)

So you can use Steamboat Mickey's image and design, but you can't use his name?

I think you've kinda got it.

If Batman became public domain it would mean just the stories that fall on the year things became public domain would qualify. So the first year would be the 1939 stuff (Detective Comics #27 to I think #35 or 36, since #35 has the "January 1940" cover date, meaning the book came out either the previous month or two before), second year the 1940 stuff, and so on. And it means that everyone who wants to use a public domain Batman would be using:

-the Bat-outfit with purple gloves
-Commissioner Gordon
-their own take on what happens to Alfred Stryker
-Dr. Death
-The Monk
-Frenchy Blake
-Carl Kruger
-Duc D'Orterre
-Sheldon Lennox
-the Batman origin (as long as you don't use stuff that got incorporated in later, like Miller's take)

Depending on what month Detective Comics #36 was released, it could be pd the first year as well, if the "February 1940" cover date was two months ahead of the actual publishing month/year. But someone would need to check on that. If it became PD then that would bring in Hugo Strange's first appearance.

You wouldn't be able to use Dick Grayson, Selina Kyle, and Joker until the 1940 stuff became PD, and you wouldn't be able to use Alfred until the 1943 stuff became PD.

The only issue you may have is trademark, which means you can't call your comic "Batman" or something. This may be an issue with making a shirt based on the cover of Detective Comics #27. It could be possible you could get away with it if it's just that cover, but we don't know what the active trademark would cover.

If you're doing a comic, you can probably use his name inside the book but not on the title. Sort of like how DC gets around calling Billy Batson "Captain Marvel" in the comic but not in the title or ads or packaging.

It's the ears

>around_elves_watch_yourselves.jpg