Fair Use Disney Mashup

Filed in Uncategorized by on June 5, 2007

This is pretty funny and informative.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJn_jC4FNDo]

Jason Ads this From Wikipedia:

The Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998—alternatively known as the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act or pejoratively as the Mickey Mouse Protection Act—extended copyright terms in the United States by 20 years. Before the Act (under the Copyright Act of 1976), copyright would last for the life of the author plus 50 years, or 75 years for a work of corporate authorship; the Act extended these terms to life of the author plus 70 years and 95 years respectively.

Think about it: the life of the author plus 70 yearsThis was pure corporate welfare. Back in the dark ages (befor blogs) I wrote letters to Biden and Carper urging them to vote against it. Needless to say they both wrote back saying “Thanks for your letter, but I (heart) corporate welfare. Corporations give me lots and lots of money.”

Tags:

About the Author ()

Comments (7)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. anon says:

    Have you ever heard of artists? As a professional photographer I would go bankrupt if I did not have the protection of copyrights. Believe me I am far from corporate. Copyrights are actually extremely important to the little guy just as much as big business.

  2. Alan Coffey says:

    anon fails to address your concerns completely. Nobody wants to get rid of copyright.

    The other problem we have with copyright is the courts restrictions on Fair Use. Fear and overlitigation have made it almost impossible to use anything even if it is in the public domain. We need more defense of this right.

  3. liberalgeek says:

    anon, did you watch the video? How about this, William Shakespeare is in the public domain. True, he isn’t making money any more…BUT HE’S DEAD! Face it, copyright laws have been distorted to protect a mouse.

  4. Bill says:

    The idea behind copyright was to give a “temporary” right to a creator (or their assignee) to exclude others from using an original artistic expression, regardless of the constitution’s protection of free speech. This right would provide people with incentive to create and innovate.

    The original period of copyright in the US was 14 years, and was extended, and extended, and extended again. Most of the most recent extensions seem to have been backed by corporations, like Disney, who ironically had their largest successes with material taken from the public domain.

    Copyright now often acts as a bar to innovation and creation rather than an inspiration.

  5. eric hebert says:

    I wouldn’t say it’s a bar to innovation. If anything it makes people MORE innovative because they can’t just steal other people’s ideas.

    Back when copyright protection was a 14 year long event, was the media industry the same as it is today? Don’t think so.

    Was intellectual property worth as much as it is today? Probably not.

    Was their the technology to take an intellectual property and write stories, produce films and TV shows, music and art and merchandise it as easily as it is today?

    NO!

    If I’m George Lucas, do I want someone making a TV show or movie about Star Wars after I’m dead if I didn’t give it my approval? Why should someone else make a buck off of MY ideas?

    BTW, anyone know what the law states if a business owns the property instead of an individual? I assume the protection lasts forever?

    And if Shakespeare were alive, how pissed would he be?

    That “mouse” did the rest of us a favor. And if you’re not producing a work yourself, why do you even care? Just because some corporation is behind protecting their assets?

  6. liberalgeek says:

    Suppose that Beauty and the Beast were still under copyright, or Sleeping Beauty… I don’t have a problem with them making money, but just like with medication patents, they should be freed at a defined point in the future. The point is that Shakespeare was already dead when his copyright ran out.

  7. Chris says:

    So then what? Just like in the recent case in China, someone can just go ahead and make a whole theme park ripped off from Disney? Cane people then start putting out “Mickey Mouse” adult films?

    This movie was obviously made by someone without the ability to create a new idea. Hence the “mash up”. Believe me, if that character had th ability to create something knew, he would change his tune real quick.

    Its just another case of Corporate Envy. The guy is probably a Universal fan and can’t stand that Disney’s parks are STILL beating the pants off of Universal.