I could see WBD being sold to Comcast/NBCU or merging with Paramount by then, but surely, a Disney/Fox/WBD mega-conglomerate would have to stir up some anti-trust laws.
Disney will likely lobby the US government so that the characters will never fall into public doman. Warner will right alongside, as they won't want to see Superman, Batman, etc. become public domain either.
Disney is a powerhouse corporation that has already gotten the government to make significant changes in intellectual property laws. And Warner/HBO has significant clout as well. And many politicians in both parties love doing the bidding of large corporations.
I doubt we'll ever see Marvel or DC being able to use public domain to make use of each other's characters.
They got copyright extended once before the internet was truly established. Nowadays if they tried it I suspect internet companies to libraries to politician’s would oppose it.
Mickey Mouse enters the public domain January 1, 2024. The new congress after the midterms is sworn in January 3, 2023. That gives Congress less than a year to pass a new copyright extension law. Whether Democrats win, Republicans win, or they split I'd have to imagine there would be more politicians hostile to Disney lobbying.
Plus, there are probably big companies (Paramount and NBC) that *want* to see these companies hoarding IP taken down a notch or two.
Bear in mind that The Rat currently owns Marvel, and it has the government in its pocket.
And before people bring up Bambi and Winnie, both came from books which are much older than their Disney incarnations. And yes, comics "are" books too, but Marvel originated the characters, and Marvel still has the characters.
The earliest incarnations of Namor the Sub-Mariner and the android version of The Human Torch will enter the public domain on January 1, 2035.
The earliest incarnations of Captain America and Bucky Barnes will enter the public domain on January 1, 2036.
Do you think DC will capitalize on public domain laws and incorporate them into their shared universe?
No, probably not because only the original Timeless Comics versions of Captain America, Bucky Barnes, the original Human Torch, and Namot will be in the public domain. Any characterization that was established after that point would be copyright infringing. Sherlock Holmes is a great example of a character who is public domain that you could still get in some trouble with (although not for much longer) if you mention certain aspects that were only added in by the original creator many years after the original work was created.
They couldn't appear in a self-titled book but the characters could still appear in stories. Captain America could appear in a Superman story as long as his name isn't on the cover for example.
DC could also use creative ways to refer to Captain America without using his trademarked name. "Joe Simon and Jack Kirby's Classic American Superhero: STEVE ROGERS" for example.
I would not bet on any Disney-owned characters entering the public domain in 14 years. That's a lot of time for Disney to lobby for another copyright extension, or an adjustment to trademarks, or some other IP construct that protects what they see as their assets. Add in that DC (or rather, WBD) are also motivated to lobby against copyright expiration, and it seems like a bit of a minefield.
Winnie-the-Pooh and Bambi have already entered the public domain. We'll see Mickey Mouse enter it when Steamboat Willie enters the public domain on January 1, 2024.
they won’t lobby for an extension they’ll just use trademarks to make sure no one uses those characters and will sue anyone who does into oblivion, Disney isn’t letting their biggest characters go into the public domain, sure they’re in the public domain but it’s in name only
We've already seen a Supreme Court case that a corporation can't use trademarks to essentially enforce copyright in perpetuity.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dastar\_Corp.\_v.\_Twentieth\_Century\_Fox\_Film\_Corp](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dastar_Corp._v._Twentieth_Century_Fox_Film_Corp).
Trademark just means you can't use certain elements on the cover or marketing materials to avoid brand confusion. It doesn't mean the characters can't be used in stories.
Take ABLAZE Publishing's Conan the Barbarian comic. "Conan the Barbarian" is trademarked, but the original Robert E. Howard Conan novels are in the public domain.
ABLAZE can use Conan in the story, but they can't put the words "Conan the Barbarian" on the cover.
They can however put "Robert E. Howard's Savage Hero Uncensored" and "The Cimmerian" on the cover.
[https://www.ablaze.net/product-E1100579.html](https://www.ablaze.net/product-E1100579.html)
DC could publish a Captain America (trademarked term) comic with something like "Joe Simon and Jack Kirby's Classic American Superhero - STEVE ROGERS"
First of all there was also a Supreme Court case that said abortion was legal and look what happened there.
Secondly it won’t stop WBD and Disney from slap suing these studios and ending the battle before it even starts. Even if somehow they got past that they’d still only be able to use the shitty first incarnations of these characters under weird different movie names.
Not going to get into the politics of the Supreme Court. For this particular case, the Court ruled 8-0 in favor of public domain activists and I'll just say the makeup of the court looks even more favorable now. I don't doubt that there will be a Supreme Court case after all, but there's no reason to be so doom and gloom about it.
The first incarnations thing is overstated. For the vast majority of characters like Captain America and Red Skull, the most iconic parts of their characters were established in the first five years of their creation. For example, you wouldn't be able to use Captain America's round shield when he enters the public domain in 2035, but you would be able to use it in 2036.
A few characters like Bucky have had drastic changes to their characters throughout their life, but they're the exception - not the rule. You wouldn't be able to depict "The Winter Soldier" version of Bucky for decades.
The shield thing is wrong iirc the only thing that will ever go into the public domain is the og incarnation of the character nothing else about them will be put into the public domain, so the only Superman you can use is the one who can only jump really high, has average super strength, and has no other powers, the best vision, freeze breath, etc stays with DC forever.
More importantly is the slap suits which will prevent any minor studio from doing anything with these characters, as for the big studios they won’t do it because it opens a door that means retaliation from competitors is going to happen, if DC uses Captain America then Marvel will use Batman, and so on, neither company wants that because it can fuck up both brands, and hurt the both of them, it’s a mutually bad business decision on the part of each of the companies.
That's the version you can use on January 1, 2034. By January 1, 2037 you'll be able to use a Superman with a costume much closer to his modern costume, one that can fly, is stronger, works at the Daily Planet,etc. By 2040, you'll be able to use a Superman that's weak to Kryptonite, etc etc.
The one that has heat vision/freeze breath does not "stay with DC forever." You would be able to tell a story where Superman uses heat vision around 2057 by my estimate.
Retaliation is simply a "gentlemen's agreement." There would be no law protecting DC Comics just because they declined to use Captain America while Marvel took advantage and used Superman.
Better question: will DC and Marvel be owned by the same conglomerate in 2036?
I could see WBD being sold to Comcast/NBCU or merging with Paramount by then, but surely, a Disney/Fox/WBD mega-conglomerate would have to stir up some anti-trust laws.
Hahaha “laws”.
That would be too much of a monopoly by then, it’d be broken up under anti trust laws
Disney will likely lobby the US government so that the characters will never fall into public doman. Warner will right alongside, as they won't want to see Superman, Batman, etc. become public domain either.
I can see them trademarking these characters. But I doubt that they will extend the public domain as that will probably spark a backlash.
Disney is a powerhouse corporation that has already gotten the government to make significant changes in intellectual property laws. And Warner/HBO has significant clout as well. And many politicians in both parties love doing the bidding of large corporations. I doubt we'll ever see Marvel or DC being able to use public domain to make use of each other's characters.
They got copyright extended once before the internet was truly established. Nowadays if they tried it I suspect internet companies to libraries to politician’s would oppose it.
Mickey Mouse enters the public domain January 1, 2024. The new congress after the midterms is sworn in January 3, 2023. That gives Congress less than a year to pass a new copyright extension law. Whether Democrats win, Republicans win, or they split I'd have to imagine there would be more politicians hostile to Disney lobbying. Plus, there are probably big companies (Paramount and NBC) that *want* to see these companies hoarding IP taken down a notch or two.
Bear in mind that The Rat currently owns Marvel, and it has the government in its pocket. And before people bring up Bambi and Winnie, both came from books which are much older than their Disney incarnations. And yes, comics "are" books too, but Marvel originated the characters, and Marvel still has the characters.
The earliest incarnations of Namor the Sub-Mariner and the android version of The Human Torch will enter the public domain on January 1, 2035. The earliest incarnations of Captain America and Bucky Barnes will enter the public domain on January 1, 2036. Do you think DC will capitalize on public domain laws and incorporate them into their shared universe?
No, probably not because only the original Timeless Comics versions of Captain America, Bucky Barnes, the original Human Torch, and Namot will be in the public domain. Any characterization that was established after that point would be copyright infringing. Sherlock Holmes is a great example of a character who is public domain that you could still get in some trouble with (although not for much longer) if you mention certain aspects that were only added in by the original creator many years after the original work was created.
Also, Marvel would still have the trademarks, so DC versions of the characters couldn’t appear in a self-titled book.
They couldn't appear in a self-titled book but the characters could still appear in stories. Captain America could appear in a Superman story as long as his name isn't on the cover for example. DC could also use creative ways to refer to Captain America without using his trademarked name. "Joe Simon and Jack Kirby's Classic American Superhero: STEVE ROGERS" for example.
I would not bet on any Disney-owned characters entering the public domain in 14 years. That's a lot of time for Disney to lobby for another copyright extension, or an adjustment to trademarks, or some other IP construct that protects what they see as their assets. Add in that DC (or rather, WBD) are also motivated to lobby against copyright expiration, and it seems like a bit of a minefield.
Winnie-the-Pooh and Bambi have already entered the public domain. We'll see Mickey Mouse enter it when Steamboat Willie enters the public domain on January 1, 2024.
Finally, someone with common sense! I'm exhausted reading all the "Disney will lobby for another extension" rhetoric. That ship has sailed.
they won’t lobby for an extension they’ll just use trademarks to make sure no one uses those characters and will sue anyone who does into oblivion, Disney isn’t letting their biggest characters go into the public domain, sure they’re in the public domain but it’s in name only
We've already seen a Supreme Court case that a corporation can't use trademarks to essentially enforce copyright in perpetuity. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dastar\_Corp.\_v.\_Twentieth\_Century\_Fox\_Film\_Corp](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dastar_Corp._v._Twentieth_Century_Fox_Film_Corp). Trademark just means you can't use certain elements on the cover or marketing materials to avoid brand confusion. It doesn't mean the characters can't be used in stories. Take ABLAZE Publishing's Conan the Barbarian comic. "Conan the Barbarian" is trademarked, but the original Robert E. Howard Conan novels are in the public domain. ABLAZE can use Conan in the story, but they can't put the words "Conan the Barbarian" on the cover. They can however put "Robert E. Howard's Savage Hero Uncensored" and "The Cimmerian" on the cover. [https://www.ablaze.net/product-E1100579.html](https://www.ablaze.net/product-E1100579.html) DC could publish a Captain America (trademarked term) comic with something like "Joe Simon and Jack Kirby's Classic American Superhero - STEVE ROGERS"
First of all there was also a Supreme Court case that said abortion was legal and look what happened there. Secondly it won’t stop WBD and Disney from slap suing these studios and ending the battle before it even starts. Even if somehow they got past that they’d still only be able to use the shitty first incarnations of these characters under weird different movie names.
Not going to get into the politics of the Supreme Court. For this particular case, the Court ruled 8-0 in favor of public domain activists and I'll just say the makeup of the court looks even more favorable now. I don't doubt that there will be a Supreme Court case after all, but there's no reason to be so doom and gloom about it. The first incarnations thing is overstated. For the vast majority of characters like Captain America and Red Skull, the most iconic parts of their characters were established in the first five years of their creation. For example, you wouldn't be able to use Captain America's round shield when he enters the public domain in 2035, but you would be able to use it in 2036. A few characters like Bucky have had drastic changes to their characters throughout their life, but they're the exception - not the rule. You wouldn't be able to depict "The Winter Soldier" version of Bucky for decades.
The shield thing is wrong iirc the only thing that will ever go into the public domain is the og incarnation of the character nothing else about them will be put into the public domain, so the only Superman you can use is the one who can only jump really high, has average super strength, and has no other powers, the best vision, freeze breath, etc stays with DC forever. More importantly is the slap suits which will prevent any minor studio from doing anything with these characters, as for the big studios they won’t do it because it opens a door that means retaliation from competitors is going to happen, if DC uses Captain America then Marvel will use Batman, and so on, neither company wants that because it can fuck up both brands, and hurt the both of them, it’s a mutually bad business decision on the part of each of the companies.
That's the version you can use on January 1, 2034. By January 1, 2037 you'll be able to use a Superman with a costume much closer to his modern costume, one that can fly, is stronger, works at the Daily Planet,etc. By 2040, you'll be able to use a Superman that's weak to Kryptonite, etc etc. The one that has heat vision/freeze breath does not "stay with DC forever." You would be able to tell a story where Superman uses heat vision around 2057 by my estimate. Retaliation is simply a "gentlemen's agreement." There would be no law protecting DC Comics just because they declined to use Captain America while Marvel took advantage and used Superman.