Party Like It's 1925 On Public Domain Day (Gatsby And Dalloway Are In)

[sasazuka]

Any comic strip/book characters in the PD this year?
I often find these lists sad because quite often characters/works disappear after the author's death because of copyright.
By the time much of this stuff public domain, almost nobody gives a shit about the material anymore.

Eh, I think the only character debut I see for 1925 listed in Wikipedia that all many people today would recognize is Eustace Tilley, the New Yorker mascot.

All of Winsor McCay's Dream of the Rarebit Fiend comic strip is now in public domain, since it ended in 1925.

Spoiler: 1925 in comics

From Wikipedia.

• February 14: The first episode of S. K. Perkins' Spadger's XI is published, which will continue until 1931, when Chick Gordon takes over the series.[44]
• February 21: The first issue of the American humor and cartoons magazine The New Yorker is published. On its cover their mascot, Eustace Tilley, designed by Rea Irvin, makes his debut.[45]
• February 22: Ruth Vickery's Betty and Bill is first published. It will run until 3 May, after which the series restarts on 28 June and runs until 2 May 1926.[46]
• April 4: The final episode of Al Posen's Them Days Is Gone Forever is published.[47]
• May 3: Alain Saint-Ogan's Zig et Puce makes its debut in Dimanche Illustré, weekly supplement of the French newspaper l’Excelsior.[48][49]
• June 1: Bill Conselman and Charles Plumb's Ella Cinders makes its debut and will run until 1961, distributed by the United Feature Syndicate.[50]
• August 9: Wynne W. Davies published the first episode of Percy the Pommy.[51]
• August 30: Ferd Johnson's Texas Slim makes its debut through the Chicago Tribune Syndicate.[52]
• November 22: Salvador Bartolozzi launches the first issue of the Spanish children's magazine Pinocho, in which his comics character Pinocho makes its debut. The magazine will run until 1931.[53]
• December 14: The final issue of Jungle Jinks magazine is published. It is retitled: Playbox.[31][32]
• December 25: In Alain Saint-Ogan's Zig et Puce, Alfred the penguin makes his first appearance.[54]
• December: Paul Robinson's Etta Kett makes its debut.
• The final episode of Winsor McCay's Dream of the Rarebit Fiend is published.
• Frans Masereel publishes the pantomime comics graphic novel La Ville: cent bois gravés (The City).
• Faith Burrows's Flapper Filosofy makes its debut.
• J. P. Arnot's Helpful Henry makes its debut. It will run for about a year.
• Ola Fogelberg's Pekka Puupää makes its debut. It wil run until 1975.[55]
• Sergej Mironović Golovčenko creates Maks i Maksic.[56]
• George Hager and his sister Mary Hager Dearborn take over their father's, Dok Hager, Dok's Dippy Duck and retitle and continue it as The Adventures of Waddles.[57]

It's still 14 years before anyone can make their own Batman adaptation, and only then based on comics from 1939 (but I don't think Batman movies set in the 1930s without any influences from later filmed Batman productions is necessarily a bad thing).

 

[Antipathy]

It's so good to see the Public Domain finally expanding again. Keep an eye out for corporations trying to extend copyright law further, and if you do see that sort of despicable shit happening, make sure you spread the word of it and bitch to all people in office that you can send an email to about the theft of American culture from the American people.

 

[soy_king]

I thought parody was covered under fair-use anyways?

Not automatically, and not for everything. Directly ripping off characters to go on psychedelic hijinks, for example, counts as infringement because the Mouse commands an army of lawyers larger than the hordes of Sauron.

 

[sasazuka]

It's so good to see the Public Domain finally expanding again. Keep an eye out for corporations trying to extend copyright law further, and if you do see that sort of despicable shit happening, make sure you spread the word of it and bitch to all people in office that you can send an email to about the theft of American culture from the American people.

What I suspect is going to happen in the 2030s, once still-profitable feature-length movies like Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (1937), Gone with the Wind (1939), and The Wizard of Oz (1939) hit the public domain, is that the studios will argue that each remaster the film has been through since the 1930s counts as a separate production so that you'd effectively only be allowed to screen or duplicate for commercial use theatrical prints from the 1930s for the time being, theatrical prints from that era being something very few people have in watchable condition.

And that's without changing copyright law as it exists today.

 

[Mr. ShadowCreek]

What I suspect is going to happen in the 2030s, once still-profitable feature-length movies like Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (1937), Gone with the Wind (1939), and The Wizard of Oz (1939) hit the public domain, is that the studios will argue that each remaster the film has been through since the 1930s counts as a separate production so that you'd effectively only be allowed to screen or duplicate for commercial use theatrical prints from the 1930s for the time being, theatrical prints from that era being something very few people have in watchable condition.

And that's without changing copyright law as it exists today.

Steamboat Willie will enter the public domain in 2024. It should be interesting to see where things go from there. I'm sure Disney will try to change the laws or find some kind of loophole. But anyone can sell a shirt with the Steamboat Willie design and it would be legal.

 

[Super-Chevy454]

What I suspect is going to happen in the 2030s, once still-profitable feature-length movies like Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (1937), Gone with the Wind (1939), and The Wizard of Oz (1939) hit the public domain, is that the studios will argue that each remaster the film has been through since the 1930s counts as a separate production so that you'd effectively only be allowed to screen or duplicate for commercial use theatrical prints from the 1930s for the time being, theatrical prints from that era being something very few people have in watchable condition.

And that's without changing copyright law as it exists today.

That reminds me a story more or less similar about Anne Frank's diary where the EU copyright laws are different from the US.

 

[Syaoran Li]

Steamboat Willie will enter the public domain in 2024. It should be interesting to see where things go from there. I'm sure Disney will try to change the laws or find some kind of loophole. But anyone can sell a shirt with the Steamboat Willie design and it would be legal.

I think Disney knows that trying to extend copyright a third time after perma-fucking US copyright law twice in 1976 and 1999 respectively is just bad PR and not worth the fight. There's now a wider push for expanding the public domain that wasn't there in the 70's or even the 90's.

Plus. Steamboat Willie's nothing like Mickey as we know him today and they still have the trademarks.

Personally, I think Disney's going to let Steamboat Willie enter the public domain and bank on that for positive PR while making it clear that any attempt at using Mickey Mouse in any meaningful way aside from the original Steamboat Willie cartoon will result in the Rat sending in the lawyers.

I think the real acid test will be what Warner does in 2031 when we see Batman and Superman enter the public domain.

If there isn't a third copyright extension, I think Superman will be fine thanks to trademarks and the fact he's not marketable in the 21st Century without tying him to later characters and concepts that would still be under copyright.

Batman's in a similar situation up to a point, but you can do a lot more with him than Superman.

Sure, a Batman story coming out in 2033 couldn't include The Joker or Robin without breaching copyright, but Batman also goes after more mundane criminals and the occasional vampire as well.

Heck, a simple title change and a disclaimer saying the work is in no way connected to DC or Warner should theoretically be enough to keep away the trademark lawyers when Batman enters public domain.

What I suspect is going to happen in the 2030s, once still-profitable feature-length movies like Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (1937), Gone with the Wind (1939), and The Wizard of Oz (1939) hit the public domain, is that the studios will argue that each remaster the film has been through since the 1930s counts as a separate production so that you'd effectively only be allowed to screen or duplicate for commercial use theatrical prints from the 1930s for the time being, theatrical prints from that era being something very few people have in watchable condition.

And that's without changing copyright law as it exists today.

Eh, I could see them maybe arguing that but I doubt it'll hold up in court or in the legislatures.

More likely, a scenario like you're describing would only apply to cuts that are significantly altered like TV edits (Wizard of Oz had the sepia-toned segments as black-and-white for the TV and VHS cuts until the 90's) or your Lucas-style digitally remastered edits where entire new elements are added in.

They've already do a lot to keep "problematic" older films like Gone With The Wind out of the public's hands and will just keep using cancel culture instead. With the bigwigs pushing for the demise of physical media and making these works harder to come by, trying to do what you're describing seems redundant, at least until the original Star Wars enters public domain in 2067 and by then we'll all either be elderly geezers or just plain dead.

 

[sasazuka]

I think the real acid test will be what Warner does in 2031 when we see Batman and Superman enter the public domain.

Isn't it 2034 for Superman and 2035 for Batman (and 2036 for the Joker)?

 

[Syaoran Li]

Isn't it 2034 for Superman and 2035 for Batman (and 2036 for the Joker)?

My mistake.

For some reason, I was thinking the works from 1939 enter the public domain in 2031.

 

[Tragi-Chan]

Eh, I think the only character debut I see for 1925 listed in Wikipedia that all many people today would recognize is Eustace Tilley, the New Yorker mascot.

All of Winsor McCay's Dream of the Rarebit Fiend comic strip is now in public domain, since it ended in 1925.

Spoiler: 1925 in comics

From Wikipedia.

• February 14: The first episode of S. K. Perkins' Spadger's XI is published, which will continue until 1931, when Chick Gordon takes over the series.[44]
• February 21: The first issue of the American humor and cartoons magazine The New Yorker is published. On its cover their mascot, Eustace Tilley, designed by Rea Irvin, makes his debut.[45]
• February 22: Ruth Vickery's Betty and Bill is first published. It will run until 3 May, after which the series restarts on 28 June and runs until 2 May 1926.[46]
• April 4: The final episode of Al Posen's Them Days Is Gone Forever is published.[47]
• May 3: Alain Saint-Ogan's Zig et Puce makes its debut in Dimanche Illustré, weekly supplement of the French newspaper l’Excelsior.[48][49]
• June 1: Bill Conselman and Charles Plumb's Ella Cinders makes its debut and will run until 1961, distributed by the United Feature Syndicate.[50]
• August 9: Wynne W. Davies published the first episode of Percy the Pommy.[51]
• August 30: Ferd Johnson's Texas Slim makes its debut through the Chicago Tribune Syndicate.[52]
• November 22: Salvador Bartolozzi launches the first issue of the Spanish children's magazine Pinocho, in which his comics character Pinocho makes its debut. The magazine will run until 1931.[53]
• December 14: The final issue of Jungle Jinks magazine is published. It is retitled: Playbox.[31][32]
• December 25: In Alain Saint-Ogan's Zig et Puce, Alfred the penguin makes his first appearance.[54]
• December: Paul Robinson's Etta Kett makes its debut.
• The final episode of Winsor McCay's Dream of the Rarebit Fiend is published.
• Frans Masereel publishes the pantomime comics graphic novel La Ville: cent bois gravés (The City).
• Faith Burrows's Flapper Filosofy makes its debut.
• J. P. Arnot's Helpful Henry makes its debut. It will run for about a year.
• Ola Fogelberg's Pekka Puupää makes its debut. It wil run until 1975.[55]
• Sergej Mironović Golovčenko creates Maks i Maksic.[56]
• George Hager and his sister Mary Hager Dearborn take over their father's, Dok Hager, Dok's Dippy Duck and retitle and continue it as The Adventures of Waddles.[57]

It's still 14 years before anyone can make their own Batman adaptation, and only then based on comics from 1939 (but I don't think Batman movies set in the 1930s without any influences from later filmed Batman productions is necessarily a bad thing).

Batman in the Depression era, going up against 30s mobsters, would make a fantastic film.

 

[Pickle Dick]

My mistake.

For some reason, I was thinking the works from 1939 enter the public domain in 2031.

iirc, works published before 1978 go into public domain 96 years after their release (for example, you'll be able freely make your own distribution of Saturday Night Fever, a film released in 1977, when it goes into public domain around 2073, presuming you live that long)

 

[Syaoran Li]

iirc, works published before 1978 go into public domain 96 years after their release (for example, you'll be able freely make your own distribution of Saturday Night Fever, a film released in 1977, when it goes into public domain around 2073, presuming you live that long)

Fuck, I'd be 80 years old by then, assuming I'm still alive.

That being said, this means Batman will be in the public domain in 2035, assuming Warner or someone else doesn't have another copyright extension

Batman in the Depression era, going up against 30s mobsters, would make a fantastic film.

It definitely would.

Hell, you could even do your own spin on the Batman vs. Dracula story since Dracula is in the public domain as well.

Considering that it's happened as an official animated movie back in the 2000's and as a bootleg Filipino grindhouse movie in the 60's, I'd say there's a market for it.

Honestly, it'd be fairly easy to skirt the trademark brigades if Batman becomes public domain compared to other IP's.

All you have to do is don't include Batman in the title and have a disclaimer saying that your work is unaffiliated with DC Comics or any of their trademarks and to use only the elements of Batman that existed in 1939 and fill in any remaining gaps with your own ideas and other public domain works.

 

[sasazuka]

main compared to other IP's.

All you have to do is don't include Batman in the title and have a disclaimer saying that your work is unaffiliated with DC Comics or any of their trademarks and to use only the elements of Batman that existed in 1939 and fill in any remaining gaps with your own ideas and other public domain works.

The problem with having Batman fight your OC once the Batman character is public domain in 2035 is that I suspect Warner will be going over any non-Warner Batman productions (at least the commercial ones) with a fine-toothed legal comb looking for any elements still under copyright and, even if your OC isn't based on anything from DC Comics, DC Comics has tens of thousands of characters and your OC will almost invariably end up having some strong similarity to some obscure DC character who Warner lawyers will then claim you're ripping off even if you weren't.

 

[Syaoran Li]

The problem with having Batman fight your OC once the Batman character is public domain in 2035 is that I suspect Warner will be going over any non-Warner Batman productions (at least the commercial ones) with a fine-toothed legal comb looking for any elements still under copyright and, even if your OC isn't based on anything from DC Comics, DC Comics has tens of thousands of characters and your OC will almost invariably end up having some strong similarity to some obscure DC character who Warner lawyers will then claim you're ripping off even if you weren't.

Oh, I know of all the pitfalls that lawyers like that would use.

That's why I'd have my OC's not be superheroes, supervillians, or other "comic book" archetypes and have a villain obviously in the public domain like Dracula or James Moriarty or be stand-ins for real-life criminals like Carlo Gambino or Whitey Bulger.

 

[sasazuka]

@Syaoran Li I want to see Batman vs. Al Capone personally. It should be alright since Al Capone is a historical figure but I'm not sure whether there's an Al Capone Estate with its own lawyers preventing the use of Al Capone in anything that isn't a straight historical drama.

 

[Syaoran Li]

@Syaoran Li I want to see Batman vs. Al Capone personally. It should be alright since Al Capone is a historical figure but I'm not sure whether there's an Al Capone Estate with its own lawyers preventing the use of Al Capone in anything that isn't a straight historical drama.

Personally, I'd take the Roman A Clef approach that guys like Martin Scorsese and Hunter S. Thompson are known to use where real-life figures are given fictionalized names for legal and artistic reasons.

Goodfellas is a prime example of what I'm talking about where the main character Henry Hill is presented with his real name since he lent his permission but everyone else has their real first names but a fictional surname.

James Burke being called Jimmy Conway and Paulie Vario referred to as Paulie Cicero, etc.

 

[Dysnomia]

If you are into silent film comedies Harold Lloyd is really funny.

 

[Absolutego]

In the age of mass internet piracy, I think it's not such a big deal anymore when a work gets released into public domain.

The fact that even venal corporate IP law is ceding ground on shit like this is huge, no matter what role pirates may play in that happening.
Disney is likely to cede white glove Mickey Mouse to public domain before this decade's out, and that's 100% on grassroots protests.

 

[Scarlett Johansson]

Mrs Dalloway was disappointing. The way Virginia Woolf wrote was imsane and the book gave me a damn headache.

 

[soy_king]

What I suspect is going to happen in the 2030s, once still-profitable feature-length movies like Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (1937), Gone with the Wind (1939), and The Wizard of Oz (1939) hit the public domain, is that the studios will argue that each remaster the film has been through since the 1930s counts as a separate production so that you'd effectively only be allowed to screen or duplicate for commercial use theatrical prints from the 1930s for the time being, theatrical prints from that era being something very few people have in watchable condition.

And that's without changing copyright law as it exists today.

You're actually quite right. The copyright would only expire on the original work, and not the derivative work, which is what the remasters would be defined as.

Alternatively, they might start using them as greater part of their trademark so they can prevent usage that way (a la them incorporating Steamboat Willie into their introduction credits). The Mouse is truly the most egregiously litigious group known to man.