https://pluralistic.net/2022/12/20/free-for-2023/#oy-canada
40 years ago, giant entertainment companies embarked on a slow-moving act of arson. The fuel for this arson was copyright term extension (making copyrights last longer), including retrospective copyright term extensions that took works out of the public domain and put them back into copyright for decades. Vast swathes of culture became off-limits, pseudo-property with absentee landlords, with much of it crumbling into dust.
After 55-75 years, only 2% of works have any commercial value. After 75 years, it declines further. No wonder that so much of our cultural heritage is now orphan works, with no known proprietor. Extending copyright on all works – not just those whose proprietors sought out extensions – incinerated whole libraries full of works, permanently.
Jennifer Jenkins of the Duke University Center for the Public Domain has a very nice assemblage of some of the more notable items going into public domain this year: https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2023/
Related Stories
OK, so, we recently had the article on 2023 public domain copyrights. I watched (again) Fritz Lang's Metropolis from 1927. I've also stumbled across The Quake (2018) very recently, and watched it. The only other Euro movie I can think of, offhand, is Pan's Labyrinth. All Quiet on the Western Front?
So, what do some of you Euros consider to be important cultural items, that Americans should be familiar with? (British answers will be acceptable here, I think. You're almost Euro . . . )
Yeah, sure, I could do an internet search with the same question, alternating the term slightly if I don't get good results. But, where better to ask, than on a more-or-less international forum filled with fellow geeks and nerds? The man in the street isn't going to have the same answers as our Soylent community, on this, or any other subject!
And, it isn't necessary to restrict the discussion to Euros - Asians, South Americans, Islanders, even Canadians can suggest important cultural works for us to watch, or read, or listen to! We may have to draw the line with 'Strayans though . . . Do we really have to hear 'Play me Didgeradoo' again?
[Ed. note: The way global entertainment has been dominated by only a handful of companies over the last two or three decades, I tend to feel that it is almost impossible to produce culturally important pieces on a large scale any more for fear that they would only have limited mass appeal and not get funded, so I would also love to hear what items I should to add to my watch/listen list that I might be missing out on. --hubie]
As noted a few days ago, many notable works from the 1920s have ascended to the public domain in the US this year, as of New Year's Day. Cartoon Brew asks, What Happens When 'Steamboat Willie' Hits The Public Domain In 2024? and briefly covers a bit of what the public is set to gain. Notably, the earliest iteration of Mickey Mouse will enter the public domain then as a result.
Assuming that 17 U.S.C. §§ 108, 203(a)(2), 301(c), 302, 303, 304(c)(2) is not modified yet again, be sure to observe the difference between trademarks and copyright.
Previously:
(2022) 2023's Public Domain is a Banger
(2022) Digitization Wars, Redux
(2022) Public Domain Day 2022
(2021) Public Domain Day in the USA: Works from 1925 are Open to All!
As a result of book publishers successfully suing the Internet Archive (IA) last year, the free online library that strives to keep growing online access to books recently shrank by about 500,000 titles.
IA reported in a blog post this month that publishers abruptly forcing these takedowns triggered a "devastating loss" for readers who depend on IA to access books that are otherwise impossible or difficult to access.
To restore access, IA is now appealing, hoping to reverse the prior court's decision by convincing the US Court of Appeals in the Second Circuit that IA's controlled digital lending of its physical books should be considered fair use under copyright law. An April court filing shows that IA intends to argue that the publishers have no evidence that the e-book market has been harmed by the open library's lending, and copyright law is better served by allowing IA's lending than by preventing it.
[...]
IA will have an opportunity to defend its practices when oral arguments start in its appeal on June 28."Our position is straightforward; we just want to let our library patrons borrow and read the books we own, like any other library," Freeland wrote, while arguing that the "potential repercussions of this lawsuit extend far beyond the Internet Archive" and publishers should just "let readers read."
[...]
After publishers won an injunction stopping IA's digital lending, which "limits what we can do with our digitized books," IA's help page said, the open library started shrinking. While "removed books are still available to patrons with print disabilities," everyone else has been cut off, causing many books in IA's collection to show up as "Borrow Unavailable."
[...]
In an IA blog, one independent researcher called IA a "lifeline," while others claimed academic progress was "halted" or delayed by the takedowns."I understand that publishers and authors have to make a profit, but most of the material I am trying to access is written by people who are dead and whose publishers have stopped printing the material," wrote one IA fan from Boston.
[...]
In the open letter to publishers—which Techdirt opined "will almost certainly fall on extremely deaf ears"—the Internet Archive and its fans "respectfully" asked publishers "to restore access to the books" that were removed.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday December 24 2022, @07:04PM (1 child)
All of Sherlock Holmes, supposedly, so get ready for a billion more adaptations.
Metropolis is another good one, not that copyright was its biggest problem:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolis_(1927_film)#The_Complete_Metropolis_(2010) [wikipedia.org]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday December 24 2022, @07:44PM
https://www.loc.gov/programs/national-film-preservation-board/film-registry/complete-national-film-registry-listing/ [loc.gov]
https://www.loc.gov/programs/national-film-preservation-board/film-registry/films-not-yet-named-to-the-registry/ [loc.gov]
https://www.research.net/r/national-fim-registry-nomination-form [research.net]
Nominate some films to the National Film Registry before August 15, 2023.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 5, Informative) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Saturday December 24 2022, @08:41PM (9 children)
I've been on this rock for quite a few decades now, and I've never paid a dime for music or movies. I've copied vinyls, 8-tracks and cassettes on cassettes when cassettes were the copying medium of choice for penniless teens, then I copied stuff on CDRs as soon as those became available, I filled up hard drives, flash drives, and I still do. For all the rest, there was Napster, Edonkey, and now torrents, Youtube and all the others.
Fuck copyright. I don't recognize copyright. I would recognize it and respect it if it was reasonable. But seeing as though copyright holders use it to milk the works for all its worth until the end of eternity, I have decided to disregard it, because I'll be long dead before I can legally get all that stuff in the public domain if I don't.
That's what happens when rules don't make no sense: people simply ignore them.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday December 24 2022, @08:58PM (5 children)
That's fine but this also benefits creators.
They can partially ignore it, but fully ignoring it (attempting to monetize new Sherlock Holmes stories under their real names) could result in getting sued. Not anymore.
With the Sherlock Holmes character moving fully into the public domain, you benefit by being able to pirate the new works that arise from it.
You'll also see wider distribution of public domain works, in higher quality, because nobody can be stopped from hosting it.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Saturday December 24 2022, @09:30PM (3 children)
That's true. Derivative works are a problem.
However, I was just considering it from the point of view of artwork getting orphaned, then lost because it's not in the public domain and it's not being curated. When enough people like me disregard copyright and do their own archiving and redistributing, copyright can't make artwork disappear completely.
As for derivative works, considering the quality of "sequels" of the past few years (decades?) I'd say we're not losing much. There are plenty of new pieces of work that are far better than reheated stuff.
And let's not forget that a lot of copyrighted work can be reused / reworked under the terms of fair use: if it couldn't, there would be no hip-hop or electronic music.
If you want to see fair use at its best, watch this Dune movie fan edit [youtube.com]
: not only does it take a very meh movie and turn it into something truly good, it gives the copyright holder, Legendary Pictures, a giant legal middle finger.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Sunday December 25 2022, @02:51AM (2 children)
I consider it a civic duty to violate copyright. That law is unjust, and counterproductive not only in that it can actually discourage art, but in the emotional buttons it pushes so that many artists have bought the propaganda and convinced themselves they're being robbed by ungrateful pirates. Those artists refuse to admit that the supposed losses are all fake. The law also is way too oriented around the US culture of individualism. The US has the most individualistic culture in the world. Yes, of course there's collaboration, and copyright can be joint, but that's the exception, not the rule. Take a stroll through any public library or bookstore, and one thing you'll see is that 99% of the writings are credited to a single author.
But most of all, copyright is a huge, huge drag on progress. We need better systems for rewarding artists and scientists, systems that don't hogtie everyone and hamstring the Internet. It's as if we invented airplanes, but kept these antiquated laws that so hobble them that they are no better than traveling on land and sea. It's insane that a site like Sci-Hub is illegal, and that the majority of the material our public libraries handle is still print.
(Score: 2) by legont on Sunday December 25 2022, @09:05AM
Yes, true.
I pirate everything, even the stuff I paid for. For example, like many of you, I have Amazon Prime. Yet I never watch anything they have the way they want - I pirate it.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 25 2022, @08:29PM
> It's as if we invented airplanes, but kept these antiquated laws that so hobble them that they are no better than traveling on land and sea.
We've already done that in USA. Between security and airline mergers the cost (money and time) to fly less tham, say 300 miles, is often more than driving a private car. If two people share the car costs, then the distance gets greater.
Where have you been since 9/11/2001?
(Score: 3, Informative) by krishnoid on Saturday December 24 2022, @10:12PM
For some value of the word "benefit" [tumblr.com] :-) . But hey, I'm not going to judge what people consider art.
(Score: 1) by Rodxit on Sunday December 25 2022, @11:36AM (1 child)
The last 1 million years or so artists got compensated when people liked what they do.
No artist complaint. (I also not complain then people view my pretty pretty websites and I get, you guessed it, nothing for it)
This changed about 1920 with the invention of the gramophone record.
Musicians suddenly could demand compensations for doing nothing.
This area of possible demand for compensations for doing nothing ended 2000 with Napster and the Internet.
You missed the window? Too bad.
Now go, play music, sing and get compensated for it.
Face reality and stop wining.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Thursday December 29 2022, @09:31PM
This changed about 1920 with the invention of the gramophone record.
How wrong can one short sentence be? First, copyright has always been about publishing. It has never been about copying, despite its name. Second, the Gramophone was about two decades earlier than your guess, but radio broadcasting started in the early 1920s. But third, haven't you ever read a BOOK? There have been copyrights since not long after the invention of the printing press in the 1300s. Britain still claims copyright on the King James Bible centuries later, although no one outside Britain cares.
In the US in 1900, a copyright term was 14 years. Later it was 20. I have no problem with this, everything before 2002 would now be public domain if the media moguls hadn't joined the rest of our plutocracy and bought ever longer copyright terms, so that now your copyright will outlast you for almost a century. There's nothing wrong with temporary copyright, there's everything wrong with permanent copyright.
A Black, Hispanic, or Muslim voting for Trump is like a Jew voting for Hitler
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Sunday December 25 2022, @06:21PM
I've never paid a dime for music or movies.
If you live in the US, you're perfectly legal. Here, copyright is about publication, not copying. Taping the radio was never outlawed (unlike Russia, here anything not forbidden is allowed) and in 1978 Congress went a step farther and passed the Home Recording Act. When the MPAA tried to stop production of the Betamax, that law stopped them.
In the 1970s, "piracy" was only when it was done for profit, making dozens of 8-track copies of an album and selling them at truck stops.
Now, Napster could have been copyright violation if you allowed sharing of your files; that constitutes publication.
You are absolutely correct that the Bono Act was evil and so was the Supreme Court when they said "limited" meant whatever Congress says it means. Jimi Hendrix and Jim Morrison have been dead for half a century. There is absolutely NO moral reason why their works should still be covered, or that mine should still be a century from now.
A Black, Hispanic, or Muslim voting for Trump is like a Jew voting for Hitler
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Snotnose on Saturday December 24 2022, @10:53PM (3 children)
My 5 y/o laptop doesn't have a CD drive (Huge surprise when I unboxed it, my older laptop's hard drive took a dump and I assumed a DVD drive would be included). I'm in the market for a new laptop. Guess what, you can't find one with a CD drive. Yeah, I could buy an external drive. But that costs extra and is a PITA.
I use Pirate Bay for stuff I own on CD, which I would rip myself if my laptop had a CD drive. Problem is, I like obscure stuff. It's hard to find Illuvitar, IQ, Gong, and Peter Hamill solo albums, to name a few, on torrent sites (prove me wrong. Please).
I own about 2500 CDs. I've put about 300 of them on my NAS. I would like to put about 1/3 of them on my NAS. The rest (Ozzy, Slayer, Quiet Riot) I never listen to anymore and don't care about.
On a related subject, anyone know of a laptop I could buy tomorrow (well, not tomorrow being it's Christmas and all) at around $1000, 17" screen, with a CD/DVD drive?
I retired 10 years ago. When I worked I listened to music 30 minutes twice a day commuting in my car, and 8 hours a day working. I used to work in CD increments. As in, put on a CD (later start a CD in WinAmp), when it was over pee, get more coffee, walk around a bit. Now that I don't work I listen to maybe 2 albums a week, usually while exercising.
Bad decisions, great stories
(Score: 3, Insightful) by owl on Sunday December 25 2022, @02:34AM
You can thank Apple's Jory Ive for that sad fact. His irrational desire for "thinner" and "sleeker" Apple laptops, and the sad fact that every other laptop maker seems to have a design crew that follows the mantra: "if apple does it, we must copy it" and you now have the fact that no laptops have CD/DVD drives anymore.
Unless you have the desperate need for the drive to be "in" the laptop, just buy a USB external CD/DVD drive and plug it in and rip your disks.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 25 2022, @02:08PM
I read this, had a suggestion, thought it too obvious, and moved on. Well - I'm back.
Does the NAS have an optical drive? If so, put a pile of stuff that you want available on the NAS nearby, and whenever you pass near it, stick one of those CD/DVDs into the drive and copy it. Don't make it a chore by sitting there, and copying 120 CDs all at once.
If the NAS does not have an optical drive, you can probably plug in an external drive, and do the same. It probably wouldn't even need to be a fancy optical drive enclosure. I have been known to just open the case of a computer, and plug in a hard drive or optical drive, and find a way to rest the drive so I can use it for awhile. No alterations to the cabinet or drive bays necessary.
The whole point is, don't allow the limitations of the laptop to limit you!
A MAN Just Won a Gold Medal for Punching a Woman in the Face
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Sunday December 25 2022, @06:35PM
If you have an Xbox, PlayStation, DVD player, or Blu-Ray, just run a patch cord from its headphone jack and record from them like the PC is an old fashioned tape deck; CDs aren't high fidelity, anyway. I use Audacity to record the radio (KSHE streams 7 rock albums every Sunday night) and YouTube. Of course, you need to remove commercials and insert track skips but it's not like it's real work. I think the billionaires have decreed that CDs an DVDs are obsolete.
I'd like to see my fellow middle class Americans forget about political parties and vote for people who will pass pro-middle class laws. 1% of the world's population causes 99% of its strife; the 1% who own 90% of everything. I'm not holding my breath, they're very good at keeping us at each other's throats and our minds away from what's really screwing the world.
There's no excuse for the richest nation in the world to have any citizen go hungry, but there's a reason: GREED.
A Black, Hispanic, or Muslim voting for Trump is like a Jew voting for Hitler