Will we see another copyright extension in 2018?

[The Mikado]

As you no doubt know, in 1998, Congress passed a 20 year extension to copyright, extending the period it takes for a work to enter the public domain from 75 years to 95 years and freezing the public domain as things created before 1923. 95 years from 1923 is coming right up in 2018, and many classic works from the 1920s will become public domain over the next decade under the current law. George Gershwin's musical masterpiece "Rhapsody in Blue" was composed in 1924 and will be one of the first major works to be set free, which will no doubt be quite a relief to United Airlines, which has been paying royalties to the Gershwins for decades to use that piece in their ads. The Great Gatsby, written in 1925, will soon follow, lowering the costs high school students across the country pay when they buy books. Of course, Steamboat Willie, the first Disney cartoon featuring Mickey Mouse, came out in 1927, and therein lies the real problem.

To me, the biggest benefit of the public domain rolling on is all of the books and movies that no one cares about except specialists and preservationists that have been out of print for 50 years or more but languish in obscurity because no one can digitize or distribute them due to copyright that the holder probably doesn't even know exists. Think of the travel memoirs or the current events books or the memoirs of random obscure people that historians of the 1920s have to travel to specific libraries to access when they could easily be placed on Google Books and available to everyone free of charge anywhere in the world. Think of the obscure silent movies that could be placed on Youtube free of charge to improve everyone's cultural literacy on the history of cinema that currently sit unseen in vaults because of copyrights that no one makes any money off of. Were it just me, I'd happily take a situation where copyright ended up extended on the condition that someone actually apply for an extension every 20 years, to allow all the forgotten and unwanted stuff to enter the public domain and have a second chance to shine for the benefit of historians, sociologists, music and art scholars, and enthusiasts everywhere. A situation where Rhapsody in Blue stayed in the Gershwins' hands while obscure pieces of the same era that no one remembers became part of our shared cultural heritage would be a far better situation than everything remaining off limits.

[King]

I hope they don't. I look forward to the golden age of Hollywood remakes of obscure public domain literature.

[Lief 🗽]

Probably, though with the paralysis in Congress, who knows. Unfortunately, both parties are pretty much on the side of large corporations that make their money off of intellectual property.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Obviously.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Mickey Mouse^TM will still be a copyrighted figure when the earth is swallowed by the sun.

[Goldwater]

Unfortunately, probably so.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

One of the excuses offered back in 1998 was to bring the US term of copyright into harmony with Europe's.  While there are a few places who have longer terms, I seriously doubt those could successfully be used as a fig leaf.

While it is possible, I think the EU would need to go first.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I hope that they don't, but realistically I know that the result will be something closer to this:

Mickey Mouse^TM will still be a copyrighted figure when the earth is swallowed by the sun.

[The Mikado]

I can't help but feel that the forces for copyright extension may have to compromise this time out, especially given the increasingly heavy hitters like Google that have a vested interest in not extending it that don't exactly have small pocketbooks. Google was in its infancy 1998, now they have the world's largest and most-viewed collection of public-domain literature, and own Youtube, which would benefit from having a large array of public-domain songs and movies to supplement its catalog.

I wouldn't be surprised to see some sort of scenario where the idea of having to fill out paperwork to extend copyright rather than it happening automatically is brought back...it used to be the system anyway. It keeps Disney and those that actually make money off of their copyrighted materials happy while letting the stuff that everyone's forgotten enter the public domain.

[politicus]

One of the excuses offered back in 1998 was to bring the US term of copyright into harmony with Europe's.  While there are a few places who have longer terms, I seriously doubt those could successfully be used as a fig leaf.

How so? There was a propsal of 95 years in 2008, but it was never implemented.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_2011/77/EU_on_the_term_of_protection_of_copyright

[Lief 🗽]

One of the excuses offered back in 1998 was to bring the US term of copyright into harmony with Europe's.  While there are a few places who have longer terms, I seriously doubt those could successfully be used as a fig leaf.

How so? There was a propsal of 95 years in 2008, but it was never implemented.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_2011/77/EU_on_the_term_of_protection_of_copyright

EU law is life of the author + 70 years. Prior to the 1998 CTEA, it was only life + 50 in the United States.

[The Mikado]

Bump from 11 months later. This is an issue that'll have to be addressed by the next Congress, but this Congress is showing that gridlock is the order of the day. I'm actually getting optimistic that Congress won't be able to pass anything, copyright extension or no.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

One of the excuses offered back in 1998 was to bring the US term of copyright into harmony with Europe's.  While there are a few places who have longer terms, I seriously doubt those could successfully be used as a fig leaf.

How so? There was a proposal of 95 years in 2008, but it was never implemented.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_2011/77/EU_on_the_term_of_protection_of_copyright

Didn't see this until just now.

Unlike 1998, only Colombia, Cote d'Ivorie, Guatemala, Honduras, Jamaica, and Mexico have gone beyond the life+70 year standard that is now the US standard.  If the EU were to adopt a longer standard, that might get the US to lengthen as well, but with the possible exception of Mexico, none of these six would affect it, and even then Mexico did not engage in retroactive lengthening of copyright.

[The Mikado]

Massive bump from 2 1/2 years ago. How has this question changed? Will we see a copyright extension next year? Can this Congress pass anything?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I will be highly pleased with this Congress if it fails to pass a copyright extension. Given what we are seeing out of Congress, this failure actually seems somewhat likely.

[Kingpoleon]

Hopefully we see this fought. I have been thinking about sending a few letters to the offices of Amash, Paul, Wyden, and others who I think might be likely to oppose it.

[The Mikado]

I just find it very interesting that we're three months into this Congress and legislation on this topic hasn't even been introduced yet.

[Mr. Morden]

I just find it very interesting that we're three months into this Congress and legislation on this topic hasn't even been introduced yet.

Who would be the main industry proponents of doing the extension?  Disney?  Maybe Iger isn't going to push it this time as an act of populism to promote his 2020 presidential candidacy. 

[The Mikado]

I just find it very interesting that we're three months into this Congress and legislation on this topic hasn't even been introduced yet.

Who would be the main industry proponents of doing the extension?  Disney?  Maybe Iger isn't going to push it this time as an act of populism to promote his 2020 presidential candidacy.  

Last time the big player was Disney, followed by the estates of a number of writers and musicians from the 1920s, especially George Gershwin. (Anything from before 1923 is public domain now..."Rhapsody in Blue" came out in 1924 and the Gershwin family is still making a fortune off of that piece today. Hell, United Airlines still uses it in all of their ads...and if it were public domain, United Airlines would save a fortune.)

EDIT: Presumably as the public domain line moves over time into the 1930s, the current owners of the MGM catalog (Sony) and the Universal Pictures catalog (...Comcast, apparently???) will get upset, as a lot of the MGM and Universal movies from the 1930s are still actually watched by people.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If Congress wasn't a bunch of corrupt plutocrats, they'd shorten it.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I see nothing wrong with Mickey still being copyrighted. Disney actually uses that patent, and still does, voluminously so, so it isn't like society is being shortchanged or whatnot. That being said in general I think a further 20 year extension would not be a good idea and some more measured approach would be preferable for sure.

[Goldwater]

I see nothing wrong with Mickey still being copyrighted. Disney actually uses that patent, and still does, voluminously so, so it isn't like society is being shortchanged or whatnot. That being said in general I think a further 20 year extension would not be a good idea and some more measured approach would be preferable for sure.

I would think there would be a way to protect active IPs without infinitely extending copyright laws, though admittedly I'm not very knowledgeable on the subject.

[Antonio the Sixth]

"Intellectual property" is a horrible concept that needs to die.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

I see nothing wrong with Mickey still being copyrighted. Disney actually uses that patent, and still does, voluminously so, so it isn't like society is being shortchanged or whatnot. That being said in general I think a further 20 year extension would not be a good idea and some more measured approach would be preferable for sure.

Just because Disney still uses it doesn't mean they should be able to take it out on the rest of us.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Trademarks are different things to copyright. All Disney would loose is the royalties for publishing Steamboat Willie, not the use of Mickey as a trademarked figure for their own purposes.

So when expiry on the first batman comics run out, you can start printing, selling and scanning them online without harm, but you wouldn't be able to start selling Batman merchandise.