Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jackrabbit]

Oh, I agree that it's unfair, I just don't see it as extreme a problem as Sir Pseudonymous made out. I don't feel adversely affected.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Well, consider that copyright extends to quite a lot of things. Names. Franchises. It's the reason Abandonware still isn't technically legal. There is, for example, a game called Remember Tomorrow. Now, its creator isn't dead yet as far as I'm aware, but it's completely abandoned. Due to copyright laws, nobody will be able to make an actual sequel to it until... uh, sometime in the 22nd century, I think. It may not be quite so important to you, but it reaches far further than just that, and is really aggravating to people interested in making original works.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

I fail to see how the inability to use Micky Mouse in any works I create should I wish to is fucking over society as a whole. Surely there are more important thing society has to worry about that who's making the shitty Micky Mouse cartoons. Is it because increased copyright for one person is unfair? I still don't see it is exceptionally important enough that it's having as much of a negative effect on society as the words 'fucking over society as a whole' implies.

Disney's copyrights are entirely irrelevant to anyone but Disney execs. The problem is, specifically, that every time the copyright on Walt Disney's creations is about to expire (by reaching the maximum length of copyright), they lobby congress to unilaterally increase the maximum term of copyright, meaning everything, not just Walt Disney's works, are extended as well. So essentially, any post-Walt Disney work will never fall into public domain, unless the creator/whoever they sold it to wishes it to.

[Nikov]

Wait. They want to make original works, but they're unable to because of copyright laws prevent them from making unauthorized sequels.

If they want to make a sequel to Remember Tomorrow, just approach the creator with a big suitcase o' bills and ask for the rights. Or if the creator IS dead, go up to his wife / next of kin with the same big suitcase o' bills and buy the rights from them.

Alternately, they can actually make an original work and stop sponging off of others.

Also Grak, we're in agreement on a big-time internet issue and I find it disconcerting. I think its because you changed avatars.

And what's with this 'unilaterally' word getting tossed around. Who, aside from Congress, is supposed to be making copyright laws for the United States?

[Sean Mirrsen]

Unilaterally is supposed to mean "in the same direction with the same speed", if my english is as good as I think it is.

Oh, and good point on needing a big suitcase of bills. I'm sure a lot of independent developers carry those around for such occasions.

Of course, one could make a "spiritual successor" anytime he/she/it wanted to. But thing is, the particular setting may have an appealing backstory and a sensible character set that's too much of a waste to let go like that. While I wouldn't mind seeing a "spiritual successor" to Remember Tomorrow, I'd like it a lot more if it was actually a continuation of the original. Last time I encountered a spiritual successor (Supreme Commander), it was a little too far from the source (Total Annihilation) and too close to StarCraft for my liking.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

And what's with this 'unilaterally' word getting tossed around. Who, aside from Congress, is supposed to be making copyright laws for the United States?

:/
I'm not sure where "unilateral" came from. I should have said "raise copyright across the board". Technically, unilateral works too, given that it's being enacted by one side (Disney's lobbyists), but that's a bit more awkward in meaning.


There is no reason, in this day and age, that copyright should last more than a decade for a given work itself, with possible extensions for recurring characters/settings based on reuse, specifically by the creator(s), rather than simply the copyright holders, with the burden of record keeping squarely on the creator/copyright holders. Naturally, there'd have to be additional safeguards, to prevent exploitation by rapacious, non-living entities such as Disney and other movie studios, but outlawyering corporate copyright lawyers the scum of the earth is a job for lawyers.

[Nikov]

I disagree. First, I'm sure more entities than just the eeeebil Walt Disney Corporation would like to see their intellectual property rights extended. Second, if you don't have a big suitcase of bills and can't borrow a big suitcase of bills as an investment for your project, your project probably would suck balls, not be a commercial success, and you might as well make your own original ball-sucking fiscal flop rather than tarnish someone else's work. Lastly, I think if I write a book I deserve to earn royalties from that book for the entirety of my life and any subsequent posthumous printings should earn a royalty to my survivors and heirs. Unless of course someone offered me a big suitcase of bills.

This whole thing stinks of have-not whining like land reform or entitlement programs. Waaaaah someone else has better ideas than I ever had and I can't sell my middling fanfic because the original author doesn't want me tarnishing his canon with second-rate dreck.

SO ANYWAY FUTURAMA IS BACK ISN'T THAT KICKASS GUYS? A BIG COMPANY GOT A BIG BRIEFCASE O' BILLS AND SAID HAY FOX, IF UR NOT MAKING MONEY ON FUTURAMA WE'D LIKE TO HERE'S A BIG O' BRIEFCASE FULL OF BENJAMINS DO WE HAVE A DEAL?

[Sir Pseudonymous]

Lastly, I think if I write a book I deserve to earn royalties from that book for the entirety of my life and any subsequent posthumous printings should earn a royalty to my survivors and heirs. Unless of course someone offered me a big suitcase of bills.

If that's the only motivation you have for writing, then you're going to be a pretty shitty writer. Writing takes more than just "oh hey I feel like putting an ungodly amount of effort into creating something that probably won't sell, because pop culture is fickle and arbitrary in its tastes", not even counting the resolve it would take to put all the effort into creating something, without some driving motive besides some unlikely profit. Hell, even hacks like Paolini must have motives beyond that, and I'd be willing to bet that they didn't start writing under the impression it would earning their great-grandchildren royalties.

This whole thing stinks of have-not whining like land reform or entitlement programs. Waaaaah someone else has better ideas than I ever had and I can't sell my middling fanfic because the original author doesn't want me tarnishing his canon with second-rate dreck.

Fan works are actually legal, counting as satire/commentary and thus being protected as fair use. If you're trying to sell it/use it commercially it's a little less clear cut, but it can still be done. Now, of course, legality has very little to do with whether or not you get away with it, because overly litigious copyright holders can sick packs of lawyers heinous villains on you, with no threat of punishment for squashing legal activity, so unless you have the funds to fight back, it doesn't really matter.

SO ANYWAY FUTURAMA IS BACK ISN'T THAT KICKASS GUYS?

No, it's not. I loved Futurama, but I don't have cable, and my internet is too shitty to watch it some other way. >:|

[ed boy]

Quite frankly, a thread about futurama is not the place to discuss copyright. A little discussion outside and around the main thread theme is okay, but what is going on here has derailed the thread. If you want to continue discussion of the subject, I suggest that you start a new thread.

but on the subject of futurama:
the most recent one with the cats is awesome, perhaps because my cat uses such manipulative tricks on me.