• digger@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Show us the hands! Willie, in the public domain, doesn’t wear gloves. Mickey, still Disney IP, does wear gloves.

  • Ahri Boy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    11 months ago

    Let me clarify, only the Steamboat Willie version of Mickey Mouse characters are in public domain, not the recent versions as Disney holds the copyright. In a few years, more Mickey Mouse shorts will become public domain.

    • WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Personally, I don’t give a shit about whether Mickey Mouse is copyrighted or not. What I care about is all the other works that were kept from entering the public domain because Disney was constantly getting copyright extended.

      • voidMainVoid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        11 months ago

        What’s funny is that Disney built their empire largely on public-domain works (such as fairy tales), but when it’s their turn to give back, they fight it tooth and nail. Classic getting to the top and then pulling up the ladder behind you.

  • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I’ve heard an argument that a reason why Disney has pushed Steamboat Willie lately (new intro for Disney Animation films, and a lot of merch) is because copyright law works differently from trademark law. They can still claim a trademark even if the copyrighted work is in public domain. I’m not a lawyer, but if that’s not all BS, I don’t think we have to worry about anything like this anytime soon.

    • UllallullooA
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      I am a lawyer, and that is correct. You can use old Mickey for general purposes, but not as a mark.

    • 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Meeh, it’s just a joke. It would be an aimmediate downer for me if I was a fisrt time xfce user.

    • DaBPunkt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      AFAIK you can only claim a trademark-violation if someone is (for example) selling stuff (so you couldn’t sell stuffed animals that look like an early Mickey for example).

      • UllallullooA
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        A trademark just has to be “used in commerce as a mark”. In layman’s terms, that basically means distributing goods or services with it as a logo or a name. A stuffed animal could be infringement, but using something a logo for your software is much closer to the classic infringement fact pattern.