Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

53792 readers

81 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others

Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

💰 Please help cover server costs.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

401

The "Steamboat Willie" debacle or: Why IP does us more harm than good (www.forbes.com)

submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

62 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hello frens,

As a great opponent of any form of IP, I have been following the event of Disney's Steamboat Willie entering the public domain with great amusement. The incidents where creators have been falsely demonetized on youtube for rightfully using this film is further underpinned by Disney's decades-long shameless practices. The linked article sums it up quite well I think.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The reality is, though, that everything is an evolution of something else. "House, MD" is an evolution of Sherlock Holmes. Superman is an evolution of Hercules. If you couldn't copyright evolutions, you wouldn't be able to copyright anything at all.

In fact, creative commons licenses (like you shared) already address evolutions in the form of derivative works, which you can reserve in CC with the "ND" license type.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The reality is, though, that everything is an evolution of something else.

As a kopimist, there is no problem with that statement. However, I do live in the real world where nigh everything is nuanced. I could understand a copyright on an evolution of Mickey Mouse that were recognizable as being inspired by Mickey Mouse, but different enough to be its own entity. Simply adding color should not be considered a copyrightable evolution IMO.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

That's a question that I don't know is answerable, because it comes down to the judgement of the courts; and I certainly wouldn't want to be on the business end of the Disney legal division in that fight.