Slashdot Mirror
Lawsuit Claims Buck Rogers Is In the Public Domain
An anonymous reader writes: As reported in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, a court will decide whether Buck Rogers is in the public domain. The Buck Rogers comic strip first appeared in 1929. Team Angry Filmmakers claim that Buck Rogers entered the public domain in the mid-1950s, and they want to make a Buck Rogers movie called Armageddon 2419 A.D. They filed a federal suit this year in Los Angeles against the trust claiming ownership of the name, and the trial has been moved to Pittsburgh.
Even without that argument the writer has been deceased for 75 years so the extensions should not apply either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Francis_Nowlan
The two original stories are in the public domain in the US. Here are Project Gutenberg links.
Armageddonâ"2419 A.D.
https://www.gutenberg.org/eboo...
and
The Airlords of Han
https://www.gutenberg.org/eboo...
Of course no where in the stories was the name Buck Rogers used. That name didn't start until the comic strip.
I think you are confusing copyright with trademarks. Disney might lose the copyright of the Mickey Mouse character, but they would still have a trademark restricting others from marketing said character. Water is free to market and distribute to anyone, but you can't put "Dasani" on the bottle unless you are Coke. You also can't put it in a Coke shaped bottle as that is trademarked too.
Thus you'd be able to freely modify the stories and the character of Mickey Mouse as well as distribute without royalties, but you probably couldn't sell merchandise or run say a theme park with the trademarks.
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
The expiry of 70 years after the end of the calendar year in which the last surviving author died applies in Europe. It also applies in the United States to works of individual authorship first published in 1978 or later. But Buck Rogers was first published before 1978, and U.S. copyright in pre-1978 works follows the rule for works made for hire, expiring 95 years after the end of the calendar year in which the work was first published.
Here's a summary of the U.S. copyright term:
The moment Disney's (Or anyone else's) copyrights are due to expire they'll bribe some congrescritters to extend them again.
The Supreme Court in Eldred v. Ashcroft was careful to distinguish harmonization to the copyright term of another established major market from the possibility of "perpetual copyright on the installment plan". It allowed the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 because its express purpose was to harmonize to the European Union. In fact, harmonization is the only excuse that the Supreme Court has ever accepted for multiple successive extensions: 1978 harmonized to the Berne Convention, and 1998 harmonized to Europe. So to what established major market would an extension between now and 2025 harmonize?
Mickey Mouse is trademarked, and those trademark protections last into perpetuity... or until Disney stops defending the trademark (ie, into perpetuity). Steamboat Willy, a Mickey Mouse cartoon, is already public domain in some international jurisdictions, but the trademark is still valid. What that means in those jurisdictions, and in the US, if Disney does eventually allow the copyright to expire, is that although Mickey Mouse is trademarked, the work can be freely copied and distributed in and among those jurisdictions, as well as even have derivative works made from it, so long as any derivative works do not use the trademarked Mickey Mouse character. Actual copies of the cartoon are not considered misappropriation of the Mickey Mouse trademark because Mickey Mouse was obviously used with permission in that work.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
As I understand it, the line was that it was sinful to lend money for interest to another Jew. However, you could lend money for interest to a Gentile. Similarly, there were deals where Gentiles would hold grain in trust for Jews during passover. In order to satisfy the letter of the law, the grain was sold and then bought back. It's all about loopholes.
He effected a bored affect.