Heard a rumor on the mickey mouse rites

[cococola44]

Which i believe is bs but a friend told me yesterday that the rites for mickey mouse is expiring because it go over 100 years or something? but that doesn't make sense. He said it is because the orginal rites went to Walt Disney Himself and he is dead...i don't think it is true.

 

[EPCOTPluto]

Not true whatsoever. Think your friend is babbling about something else...

 

[cococola44]

yea i know lol i was like "there is no way that disney would loose the rites to that!" lol

 

[RiversideBunny]

.... He said it is because the orginal rites went to Walt Disney Himself and he is dead...i don't think it is true.

Yes, unfortunately for all, Walt is dead.

The rights probably are now registered with the Walt Disney Company, a corporation.

 

[sublimesting]

Your friend is on the right track from what I know. Copyrights are good for the author's life plus 70 years after which they become public domain. in certain countries, Mickey Mouse is legally public domain. Disney has petitioned Congress to change this.

There are five basic rights protected by copyright, sometimes called the five "pillars" of copyright. The owner of copyright has the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:

• To reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords;
• To prepare derivative works based upon the work;
• To distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;
• To publicly perform the work, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, and sound recordings by means of digital audio transmission;
• To publicly display the work, in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work.

A violation of any of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder is said to be a copyright infringement.
Trademarks are a different matter however, a trademark would be good as long as Disney consistantly uses it. A trademark shows that an image or usage of Mickey Mouse is authentic Disney. So, if copyright expires, I could make a stuffed animal of mickey Mouse and sell it but could not indicate it was a Disney stuffed animal.

I think as I did all this "research" while eating a salad at lunch so any legal people correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[sublimesting]

Yes, unfortunately for all, Walt is dead.

The rights probably are now registered with the Walt Disney Company, a corporation.

I don't think they are transferable. Disney succesfully extended Mickey's life by 20 years as it used to be after death plus 50 years it is now 70 years. So, the law now would beMickey is Disney's until 2036

 

[sittle]

Sublimesting is totally on the right path.

In fact... If memory serves correctly...

The Walt Disney Company was one of the driving forces of copyright law in America, throughout the 80's and 90's. They realized once Walt's original creations entered into the public domain, anyone can use them, and they would have no recourse/ability to control their usage.

I believe they were the driving force from changing the law of copyright from 56 years after creation to 70 years after death.

Artistic creations and the revenue from said can now be willed/bestowed to next of kin or appointed charities.

I believe how they circumvented the problem was turning Mickey, Donald, Goofy, Pluto and Minnie into trademarks. Copyrights expire and are transferable only to family. Trademarks last as long as the company keeps them active and they are "distinguishable"

This is according to my IPA (Illustrator Partnership of America) handbook and learnings at a certain well-regarding art college in Canada.

To the OP or anyone else that might be interested, I would recommend that a search be conducted to further enlighten yourself.... It's been a while for myself, and copyright/trademark laws can change rapidly and widely, pending their usage.... It is a very intersting field if you are a fan of art/animation/illustration.

 

[EPCOTPluto]

Well, it's kind of obvious who are the legal people around here. :lol:

 

[sublimesting]

Not true whatsoever. Think your friend is babbling about something else...

I wish it were not true as I don't want to see Disney bastardized by everyone on the planet. Even if any images and works are not Disney trademarked people don't look that closely and we'll probably see Mickey doing some unsavory things. And people will just associate all kinds of "Mickey" garbage with Disney and sully the company's good name. :shrug::wave:

 

[DisneyJoe]

Here's a nice summary:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Could be he's talking about the question over the legal status of the Steamboat Willie cartoon.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/aug/22/business/fi-mickey22

There was a thread about this last year: http://forums.wdwmagic.com/showthread.php?t=344647

 

[EPCOTPluto]

Even if any images and works are not Disney trademarked people don't look that closely and we'll probably see Mickey doing some unsavory things. And people will just associate all kinds of "Mickey" garbage with Disney and sully the company's good name. :shrug::wave:

That is true. I recall seeing very un-Disneyesque Mickeys on deviantart.

 

[WDW Vacationer]

I REALLY hope this isn't true!
"I just hope we never loose sight of one thing,it was all started by a mouse."-Walt Disney

 

[PattyBell]

That is so sad...hope that it won´t happen

 

[MissM]

Could be he's talking about the question over the legal status of the Steamboat Willie cartoon.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/aug/22/business/fi-mickey22

There was a thread about this last year: http://forums.wdwmagic.com/showthread.php?t=344647

This is what I was going to mention. There is a valid legal argument to be made for the "Steamboat Willie" appearance Mickey being out of copyright. Though Disney violently disagrees and has apparently even tried to sue people for merely publishing a dissertation discussing why it might not be as air-tight a case as Disney portrays it as. It's a very interesting read - if a bit dry.

 

[CastleBound]

Well I'll surely be picking up the rights as soon as they expire and you bet I'm gonna make my own theme park for everyone here to go to.

 

[sublimesting]

Well I'll surely be picking up the rights as soon as they expire and you bet I'm gonna make my own theme park for everyone here to go to.

If only it worked that way Disney could pick them up as a corporation. The way it will be is we can all use the images as we see fit for any reason. That is still 30 years away though so anything can happen and I have a feeling it will but you never know......

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Not to worry, folks. As long as Disney can count on Congress to extend copyright protection whenever they come around asking, we can rest assured knowing that an 80-year-old cartoon whose creator has been dead almost half a century will remain under the exclusive control of a global corporation who threatens to sue anyone suggesting that maybe the public has a right to this piece of history that long ago enriched its creator beyond his wildest dreams. I know I feel better just thinking about it.

 

[TubaGeek]

Haha!

No.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Congratulations. You just reinforced the negative stereotype of Disney's College Program by using "rites" instead of "rights."