WI: The 1998 Copyright Term Extension isn't passed?

[Tsar Nicholas The Cringe]

Originally, I was going to make this thread about the 1976 Copyright Act. But at the time, there wasn't much contemporary discussion of the effects of longer copyright laws.

However, in 1998, public figures denounced the next attempt to extend copyright laws, with figures like Lawrence Lessig and Milton Friedman lobbying hard against longer copyright laws.

So what if the efforts of Lessig succeded and copyright remained 75 years in the US? How would American culture change if stuff from the 20s to the mid-40s had been allowed to enter the public domain? And how could this affected things like Hollywood reboots, the rise of Youtube in the 2000s, and social media?

 

[ejpsan]

A version of " Gone With the Wind" by African-American film makers like Spike Lee or Steve McQueen (12 Years a Slave) that demystify the pre Civil War Antebellum era.

 

[ghappy1000]

More versions and uploadings on YouTube of works with a publication date of 1929-1948 in the US such as WW2 works, file footage and documents.

 

[Tsar Nicholas The Cringe]

A version of " Gone With the Wind" by African-American film makers like Spike Lee or Steve McQueen (12 Years a Slave) that demystify the pre Civil War Antebellum era.

In this version, would you see Rhett and Scarlett being more explicitly racist toward their slaves/domestic servants? What other classic movies would Hollywood studios subject to a brutal un-whitewashing?

More versions and uploadings on YouTube of works with a publication date of 1929-1948 in the US such as WW2 works, file footage and documents.

But would you see Youtubers fiddling around with these works, making things like YTP or even updated versions of cartoons from this era?

 

[ghappy1000]

But would you see Youtubers fiddling around with these works, making things like YTP or even updated versions of cartoons from this era?

I can see Youtubers making things like YTP or updated versions of cartoons of works uploaded to YouTube and with an original publication date of 1929-1948 as mentioned above.

 

[Tsar Nicholas The Cringe]

I can see Youtubers making things like YTP or updated versions of cartoons of works uploaded to YouTube and with an original publication date of 1929-1948 as mentioned above.

Would Hollywood in an expanding public domain continue its Comic Book movie/reboot binge, or would there be some kind of renaissance of filmmaking as people rediscover old movie techniques from the 20s and 40s.

 

[EWHM]

My guess is that you'd see a lot more viewing of old movies from the public domain. You might even see quite a bit of minor 'refurbishment' of them, because when it's Public domain you can just do that. Secondly, you'd probably butterfly away a fair bit of hostility to Disney, that really to an upturn after this copyright act of 1998.

 

[Tsar Nicholas The Cringe]

My guess is that you'd see a lot more viewing of old movies from the public domain. You might even see quite a bit of minor 'refurbishment' of them, because when it's Public domain you can just do that. Secondly, you'd probably butterfly away a fair bit of hostility to Disney, that really to an upturn after this copyright act of 1998.

But I also think the extended copyrights played a role in Disney's recent laziness.

While copyright terms that last a few decades can incentivize innovation, companies having a nearly century-long copyright make them lazier and disinclined to develop new ideas while also locking up a ton of IPs and preventing independent artists from breathing new life into them.

So would Disney's older properties falling into the public domain sooner force them to innovate with new ideas? And would the expanding public domain lead to independent creators creating new ideas that would force Disney to make new stuff rather than endlessly reboot everything?

 

[EWHM]

But I also think the extended copyrights played a role in Disney's recent laziness.

While copyright terms that last a few decades can incentivize innovation, companies having a nearly century-long copyright make them lazier and disinclined to develop new ideas while also locking up a ton of IPs and preventing independent artists from breathing new life into them.

So would Disney's older properties falling into the public domain sooner force them to innovate with new ideas? And would the expanding public domain lead to independent creators creating new ideas that would force Disney to make new stuff rather than endlessly reboot everything?

Yeah, it might make Disney a little less lazy, and Hollywood in general, because they'd have to compete with easy reproductions or adaptions of movies that were 75+ years old. But I think the power of laziness is strong. Probably just knocks a few points off their stock.

 

[ejpsan]

We could see remakes of classic movies with different endings and interpretations like Casablanca where Ilse leaves with Rick, and they leave Victor Lazso behind.
The Best Years of Our Lives is updated to the War on Terror, the character of Homer, a sailor with no hands is played by a woman.

 

[Tsar Nicholas The Cringe]

Yeah, it might make Disney a little less lazy, and Hollywood in general, because they'd have to compete with easy reproductions or adaptions of movies that were 75+ years old. But I think the power of laziness is strong. Probably just knocks a few points off their stock.

But would some of their classic characters falling into the public domain force Disney to come up with original mascots and characters?

We could see remakes of classic movies with different endings and interpretations like Casablanca where Ilse leaves with Rick, and they leave Victor Lazso behind.
The Best Years of Our Lives is updated to the War on Terror, the character of Homer, a sailor with no hands is played by a woman.

Could we see fan films based off stuff like Dracula, Scarface. and MGM’s Wizard of Oz?

 

[jacob ningen]

But would some of their classic characters falling into the public domain force Disney to come up with original mascots and characters?

probably not.. Do you mean Original characters or "Original" characters. Remember, the renaissance was in the 90s and they've often followed the Shakespearean "adapt popular characters but make dialogue and specific characters" model. Gargoyles was Disney to

On the fan film certainly

 

[Tsar Nicholas The Cringe]

probably not.. Do you mean Original characters or "Original" characters. Remember, the renaissance was in the 90s and they've often followed the Shakespearean "adapt popular characters but make dialogue and specific characters" model. Gargoyles was Disney to

On the fan film certainly

I’m saying would they come up with a new pantheon of characters to represent the company?

 

[Grammar Kaiser]

Funnily enough. Dracula was already public domain due to a filing error. This allowed Universal to sidestep lawsuits from Bram Stoker's widow.

 

[Tsar Nicholas The Cringe]

Funnily enough. Dracula was already public domain due to a filing error. This allowed Universal to sidestep lawsuits from Bram Stoker's widow.

So would a lot of so-called orphan works and other IPs that didn't get renewed fall back into the public domain? This would be incredibly important since this would affect a lot of works that didn't get copyright renewals but still ended up back under copyright.

 

[jacob ningen]

So would a lot of so-called orphan works and other IPs that didn't get renewed fall back into the public domain? This would be incredibly important since this would affect a lot of works that didn't get copyright renewals but still ended up back under copyright.

yes

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

As has been addressed before. This encourages writers/producers to develop new original material, vs recycling their older items.

 

[Tsar Nicholas The Cringe]

As has been addressed before. This encourages writers/producers to develop new original material, vs recycling their older items.

But my big question is this: if movies and cartoons from the 20s and 40s had entered the public domain by now, would the major media companies have been disinclined toward making reboots of old stuff and had been incentivized to create new stuff?

Also, how would the old copyrights from that era affected the rise of Youtube and other video platforms?

 

[jacob ningen]

But my big question is this: if movies and cartoons from the 20s and 40s had entered the public domain by now, would the major media companies have been disinclined toward making reboots of old stuff and had been incentivized to create new stuff?

Also, how would the old copyrights from that era affected the rise of Youtube and other video platforms?

What if it gets passed harder and is anti-corporate? IE copyright goes to the production team not the company so Disney has to track down the heirs of the crew of Snow White or Cinderella everyime it wants to use them. Or Quesada needing Lees permission for OMD? or TS having her own work before the Taylor versions which are different? or Waters needing Barrett and Gilmour's permission to redo DSOTM.

 

[Nivek]

What if it gets passed harder and is anti-corporate? IE copyright goes to the production team not the company so Disney has to track down the heirs of the crew of Snow White or Cinderella everyime it wants to use them. Or Quesada needing Lees permission for OMD?

That would be a rush to own everything now Rowling got lucky she sold HP rights before the new law but forget any adaptation of a song of ice and fire as HBO will want to own it and grrm will say fuck no