Slashdot Mirror
Taiwan Rejects US Copyright Extension Demands
An anonymous reader writes "Taiwan has rejected the US's demand to extend copyrights from 50 years to 70 years. Here's the news article on the Mercury News."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Absolutely not! It's an anonymously published work, which fully qualifies for copyright protection.
No sure what Disney stole other than the Mermaid.
Jungle Book from Rudyard Kipling.
Alice in Wonderland from Lewis Carroll.
Peter Pan from J.M. Barrie
That is just the animated features. Most of the "classic" Disney films are based on works with expired copyrights. (Black Beauty, 20000 Leagues Under the Sea, Heidi, etc.) Have a look at this list of books that have lost copyright and passed into the public domain. Then count how may are Disney flicks.
Disney had a rich culture of stories to draw from and reinterpret. They are trying to prevent the next generation of storytellers and media producers from doing to them what they did to earlier content creators.
The complete list of Disney films that were adaptations of works in the public domain.
20,000 Leagues Under The Sea
Alice In Wonderland
Beauty and the Beast
Cindarella
Hunchback of NotreDame
Jonny Appleseed
Jungle Book
Kidnapped
The Little Mermaid
Mulan
Paul Bunyon
Pinocchio
Sleeping Beauty
Sleepy Hollow
The Buster Keaton movie, Steamboat Bill, was not in the public domain. However Steamboat Willie was a parody of the film, which constitutes fair use of the copyrighted work.
You answered your own question. Look at the lengths involved after Disney sent the letter to stop using the Donald Duck likeness (although thats not what Christensen was doing in his mind). Copyright does not only prevent you from creating exact duplicates, it also prevents you from making derivative works. That means anything based on the story using the characters, or bearing a superficial resemblance can be determined to be infringing. So if as you say it was an interpretation of Donald Duck as something else it is technically an infringing work, because it is derivative. Disney might not have dropped its legal suit so quickly if the comic was in english.
Or for another example look at the case of the Gone with the Wind Estate (note the author is dead) vs. the author of The Wind Done Gone, a parody of the Gone with the Wind book. Even though its very different and a parody as well it was found to infringe the copyright of Gone with the Wind, and although the ban on publishing was lifted a monetary settlement had to be made to the copyright holder of Gone with the Wind.
-------- This space intentionally left blank --------