[HN Gopher] Popeye and Tintin enter the public domain in 2025 al...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Popeye and Tintin enter the public domain in 2025 along with
       Faulkner, Hemingway
        
       Author : sohkamyung
       Score  : 155 points
       Date   : 2024-12-16 10:02 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (apnews.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (apnews.com)
        
       | vrighter wrote:
       | So now that a lot of books used for studying literature will
       | become freely available, I wonder how long it's going to be
       | before the syllabus "needs revising"
        
         | bena wrote:
         | High schools still teach Shakespeare and that's always been in
         | the public domain. As is a lot of Mark Twain's works.
        
           | jjulius wrote:
           | Not only that, but what GP is suggesting would require
           | schools to have a reasonable, sizeable budget. Schools
           | provide most of that reading material, so they'd have to be
           | the party responsible for buying all of the new, copyrighted
           | books.
           | 
           | A fairly laughable idea if you follow the general trend of
           | school budgets...
        
           | technothrasher wrote:
           | Somewhat tangential, but it makes me nuts that my son's small
           | high school, that is always struggling for money, pays stupid
           | amounts for Disney scripts for the school plays instead of
           | doing Shakespeare or any of the other public domain plays out
           | there.
        
             | robertlagrant wrote:
             | How much do they spend?
        
             | KerrAvon wrote:
             | Arguably impoverishing the students, too. The impulse to
             | pander to keep both the kids and parents interested is too
             | strong, I guess.
        
             | chimpanzee wrote:
             | > pays stupid amounts for Disney scripts
             | 
             | How much do they pay exactly? Does it come out of a
             | specific program's budget, eg drama? Just curious.
             | 
             | To play a devil's advocate:
             | 
             | Perhaps the plays generate some money for the school or the
             | drama program. Disney might draw a larger audience.
             | 
             | Also, for better or worse (probably worse), Disney is
             | "safe" and designed for mass appeal.
             | 
             | Small schools probably have a harder time with these sorts
             | of decisions. Ideally, a school might encourage adaptations
             | of classics, to foster deeper understanding and creativity
             | (as well as to ensure that there aren't too many "re-runs",
             | furthering student and audience interest). But a larger
             | student populace makes that easier via access to more
             | ideas, more interest, more hands.
        
               | technothrasher wrote:
               | They pay about $1K per production. It's certainly not
               | making them any money, as the ticket sales amount to
               | about $500 total, and that money is coming from parents
               | and family who would be paying the $5 ticket price no
               | matter what is on stage. Nobody else is attending these
               | plays. I think the main reason they're doing it is
               | because it is what most the kids want to do, especially
               | because it is a combine high school/middle school play so
               | there are younger kids in it.
               | 
               | At least this year, they let the seniors pick the play
               | and completely run the show. They're still paying about a
               | grand for the rights, but they did make a more
               | interesting choice, "The Crucible".
        
               | senko wrote:
               | Since Disney classics often riffed off public domain
               | works, the school conceivably might have gone straight to
               | the source.
        
             | oliyoung wrote:
             | Maybe the argument is accessibility, Disney is much more
             | approachable and likely to get the kids invested and
             | involved than Shakespeare and is worth the cost?
             | 
             | Or they could just do Hamlet with Lions
        
       | optimalsolver wrote:
       | All episodes of the 90s Tintin animated series are on
       | DailyMotion:
       | 
       | https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x749uno
        
         | johtso wrote:
         | Internet archive has it too
         | https://archive.org/details/The.adventures.of.Tintin.animate...
        
         | Funes- wrote:
         | There's also the original 1957-1964 TV show, _Herge 's
         | Adventures of Tintin_. Here's a fragment of its original airing
         | on Catalan public television (TV3) during the 80s:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMH76zya8MQ. That's seemingly
         | the only available piece of that particular translated version
         | on the Internet, and its audio is damaged, at that. Makes me
         | think of how much content has been completely lost through the
         | years.
        
         | agumonkey wrote:
         | As a kid I found it embodied quite fittingly the naive mystery
         | of the comics, the direction, pacing, music .. everything was
         | on point. (Something that was lost on spielberg 3d movie
         | variant imo, too much indiana jones in spirit)
        
           | tkanarsky wrote:
           | I agree. The cartoons felt literally like the comics brought
           | to life.
        
       | ustad wrote:
       | I just can't get my head around that this (Tintin) is for the US.
       | For the rest, including the EU, the copyright is until around
       | 2050.
        
         | soperj wrote:
         | Hemingway has been in public domain for a while in Canada
         | (pretty sure)
        
       | alephnerd wrote:
       | I think this will be the original black and white Tintin.
       | 
       | The modern colored Tintin we see was made after WW2 and
       | drastically rehabilitated Tintin's reputation.
       | 
       | For example - https://sauvikbiswas.com/2014/11/18/tintin-in-
       | america-the-bl...
       | 
       | I love reading Tintin, but being honest about it's origins and
       | baggage is important as well. Highly recommend reading "Tintin:
       | The Complete Companion" as well.
        
         | leoc wrote:
         | IIRC there were also plenty of changes in later editions that
         | didn't relate to controversies (or to colourisation): for
         | example radio sets were made more up-to-date.
        
           | alephnerd wrote:
           | Yep! BW Tintin was already very dated by the 1950s.
           | 
           | Really shows how much progress (positive and negative)
           | happened in just 20-30 years.
        
         | eesmith wrote:
         | Looks like it will be "Tintin in the Land of the Soviets",
         | which
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tintin_in_the_Land_of_the_Sovi...
         | says "is the first volume of The Adventures of Tintin" and "it
         | was the only completed Tintin story that Herge did not
         | reproduce in colour" due to Hegre's "embarrassment at the
         | crudeness of the work."
        
           | grotorea wrote:
           | As much as I love Tintin, gotta agree with Herge here.
           | Although Congo and America aren't that much better.
        
             | alephnerd wrote:
             | Every Tintin upto "Land of Black Gold" had a black-and-
             | white version written before the war. They did not age
             | well, and if you read them you can understand why Herge had
             | a hard time in the 1945-1950 period.
        
         | indeed30 wrote:
         | I'd also mention that Tom McCarthy's "Tintin and The Secret of
         | Literature" completely changed the way in which I viewed the
         | series - genuinely exciting stuff.
        
           | alephnerd wrote:
           | Never read that before! Thanks for the rec!
        
       | johnea wrote:
       | All that WWII war propaganda becoming public domain at the
       | perfect time for inciting the next mass murder!
        
       | cableshaft wrote:
       | So in about a month we can expect to see a trailer for horror
       | film renditions of Popeye and Tintin, (also board game
       | Kickstarters that use them as a theme) like we did with Mickey
       | Mouse and Winnie the Pooh?
       | 
       | Cool. Cool cool cool.
        
         | strictnein wrote:
         | Almost a month ago the trailer for Popeye the Slayer Man was
         | released: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1hsxK0UMlQ
         | 
         | Surprisingly violent trailer, fyi.
        
       | Funes- wrote:
       | Rule 34 is going to get a lot of newfound attention, I wager.
        
         | falcor84 wrote:
         | My (IANAL) understanding is that rule 34 renditions generally
         | fall under the parody clause of fair-use in any case
        
           | kadoban wrote:
           | IANAL either, but that is _way_ oversold by the general
           | public. It's only parody if the point of the new work is
           | saying something about the original.
           | 
           | Popeye having explicit sex with Olive Oyl isn't parody, it's
           | just for people to get their rocks off. There's no commentary
           | on the original work being made. Nothing wrong with that, but
           | if people think they're in the clear because they shout
           | "parody", they're mistaken.
        
         | throwaway_1224 wrote:
         | I'm strong to the finish 'cause I eats me <CENSORED>
        
         | indrora wrote:
         | You act like that has stopped any artist. Ned time you hear
         | about a new Pokemon game releasing or any expansion to a
         | franchise. New characters will have content drawn of them
         | before the announcement is over.
        
       | danjl wrote:
       | See, every day we get new data to train LLMs. Just think, all of
       | the current LLMs were trained without Popeye, Tintin, Faulkner
       | and Hemmingway. Just imagine how much better they will be with
       | all this new public domain data to use for training! /s
        
       | srik wrote:
       | I love TinTin! I feel like we're going to see a ton of AI drawn
       | TinTin fan works pop up, will be interesting to see.
        
         | dewey wrote:
         | Is there a model that cares about copyrights and has incapable
         | of doing that right now?
         | 
         | Or is this sarcasm? Hard to tell!
        
       | randylubin wrote:
       | We run a public domain jam every January - come join us and make
       | games with the new public domain material!
       | https://itch.io/jam/gaming-like-its-1929
        
       | strictnein wrote:
       | Like was saw with Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey
       | (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt19623240/), there's now also a
       | slightly higher budget movie taking advantage of Popeye entering
       | the public domain: Popeye the Slayer Man
       | (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt30956852/). Great line from the
       | trailer: "You know why the factory closed down 20 years ago?
       | There was a spinach contamination."
       | 
       | Not be confused with Pops the Slayer Man
       | (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt33362807/), also coming out next
       | year.
        
         | judge2020 wrote:
         | Both of the mentioned movies probably wouldn't have had any
         | problem releasing while the copyright to the characters
         | remained in-tact under fair use. If someone is trying to make a
         | movie with existing well-known characters, people aren't too
         | interested in non-transformative work, and distributors
         | probably wouldn't distribute something due to the general lack
         | of audience interest.
         | 
         | The main benefit that public domain brings to a work is that
         | you can make small edits or changes to a work without violating
         | its copyright. Imagine if you wanted to go through all the
         | episodes of Spongebob, change the colors to make it clearer to
         | watch for colorblind viewers[a], and then sell those edits as a
         | box set or otherwise sell access to them via some
         | accessibility-focused streaming service. Under copyright this
         | would probably not be seen as transformative, and something
         | non-transformative then has an incredibly high bar to clear for
         | fair use to apply to it.
         | 
         | I also think that making new episodes that aren't super
         | transformative would probably not have met the burden for Fair
         | use: for example, making a new episode of Popeye that otherwise
         | follows the same script beats as existing episodes would
         | probably be seen as copyright infringement by the courts.
         | However, once you get into the territory of making a
         | sequel/prequel movie where you really flesh out his character,
         | it starts getting into the realm of qualifying for
         | transformative under fair use (depending on how the judge sees
         | it).
         | 
         | But the mentioned movies really seem like they're so different
         | from the source material. For Pooh Blood and Honey, it doesn't
         | affecting the market for the original, given the works are so
         | different in what they do (and there is likely 0.1% or less
         | overlap between the audience of the slasher genre and the
         | children's programming genre cohort), it did not use almost any
         | of the original copyrighted works to tell its story, just its
         | characters, and the content is transformative enough to where
         | it's not like it's just another episode of Winnie The Pooh.
         | 
         | This popeye film seems to use the same approach as Blood and
         | Honey: it's just Popeye killing people with stuff like "look,
         | it's the Spinach from the original episodes!".
         | 
         | a: not sure if this would actually be beneficial, but it's the
         | best example I can think of for a barely-transformative work
         | other than putting sunglasses on the characters' faces or
         | putting Subway Surfers next to it.
        
           | jeffreyrogers wrote:
           | My understanding is that what counts as fair use is not well
           | defined because litigation is expensive and publishers don't
           | want to take a gamble, go to court, and potentially lose or
           | have large legal fees to deal with.
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | Earlier discussion:
       | 
       |  _What will enter the public domain in 2025?_
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42290448
        
       | kristopolous wrote:
       | The current popeye artist is a fairly interesting public domain
       | ally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._K._Milholland ... he did a
       | mickey mouse thing at the beginning of the year. I assume he's
       | fine with it but I can't find any statements by him.
        
         | mistrial9 wrote:
         | related https://www.superherohype.com/comics/561991-popeye-
         | artist-re...
        
       | the_arun wrote:
       | Is there a place where we could see all public characters good to
       | use without payment?
        
       | thevillagechief wrote:
       | I love Tintin! People in the US grew up with Marvel comic books.
       | We grew up with Tintin, as did our parents before us. Can't wait
       | to see what people do with it.
        
       | wsintra2022 wrote:
       | Teesside Tintin was one of the early treasures of the internet, I
       | had so much joy seeing that for the first time however crude it
       | was.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-12-16 23:00 UTC)