[HN Gopher] The JAWS shark is public domain
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The JAWS shark is public domain
        
       Author : MBCook
       Score  : 104 points
       Date   : 2025-06-20 19:28 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (ironicsans.ghost.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (ironicsans.ghost.io)
        
       | finnh wrote:
       | > He went to the Museum of Natural History to study sharks, and
       | he had a model pose across a couple of stools for reference of
       | what someone looks like swimming.
       | 
       | That explains why the swimmer, at least, looks a bit fake.
        
       | cjcenizal wrote:
       | What a great story. Going from "it's a vagina with teeth, that's
       | bad" to "it's a penis with teeth, that's good" made me chuckle...
       | just sounds so typical of creatives.
       | 
       | Some might point and say sexism, but I think it's consistent with
       | established tropes. There are piles of analogies between sex and
       | aggression (the Latin word for "sheath" is vagina). An image of a
       | penis-like shark attacking a nude woman is another to throw on
       | the pile.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | The creatives of that time were so sex-minded. There were
         | countless references to Freud and Kafka, HR Giger designed
         | monsters after anatomy and fertility. Sex in general seemed to
         | be on the tip of the tongue of so many authors, writers, and
         | directors of that pre-internet era.
         | 
         | Accessible internet probably took the wind out of their sails.
         | Media has become less porny over time, and the younger
         | generations have even expressed an aversion to it.
        
       | Reason077 wrote:
       | > _"... Kastel realized that there was something fishy about the
       | painting's copyright situation."_
       | 
       | I see what you did there.
        
         | ironicsans wrote:
         | My first draft had a lot more fish puns. I decided they were a
         | distraction so I cut most of them. A few still slipped through
         | the net.
        
           | j-bos wrote:
           | I see what you did there :)
        
             | genghisjahn wrote:
             | Wow! Thats quite a catch!
        
       | bredren wrote:
       | tldr; the famous art from the Jaws movie poster was originally a
       | book cover. When first published it lacked the required
       | attribution of the time to get enforceable copyright.
       | 
       | IIRC, there are some films in public domain for having "failed"
       | to do this as well.
        
         | kQq9oHeAz6wLLS wrote:
         | The biggest is probably "Charade" with Cary Grant, Audrey
         | Hepburn and Walter Matthau.
        
       | karaterobot wrote:
       | > an artist should be able to enjoy the fruits of his work in his
       | lifetime if he wants to
       | 
       | Not if you're an illustrator doing work for hire. It's not
       | unreasonable or unusual for the company who commissioned the art
       | to own the copyright. It doesn't always work that way, but
       | there's no reason to think Kastel was robbed without us knowing
       | the actual terms of his contract with Universal. I assume he sold
       | the copyright to Universal, and Universal fumbled the copyright
       | after that, but that doesn't mean it reverts back to Kastel.
        
         | jfengel wrote:
         | As I understand it, problem wasn't Universal. It was that the
         | publisher didn't put his name on the copyright page, so the art
         | became public domain under the laws at the time.
         | 
         | That law has been replaced and you now get copyright
         | automatically.
        
           | tanewishly wrote:
           | That was my takeaway as well. The weird thing is: since it's
           | someone else doing the initial publication, their omission of
           | copyright credits is costing the artist their copyright.
           | That's... unexpected. I don't know how things worked back
           | then in book art, but if the artist wasn't contracted as
           | work-for-hire, protecting their copyright ought to become the
           | burden of those who actually made the art public. I don't
           | know if this argument was put forth in appeals, but
           | ruling+motivation on this point from the appeals committees
           | are absent from the story.
           | 
           | Sounds like you could accidentally make someone else's art
           | public domain by forgetting to include them on the copyright
           | page...
           | 
           |  _edit_ well, perhaps that 's part of the reason the
           | copyright laws were updated.
        
       | nocoiner wrote:
       | God, I love pre-1976 copyright. So many formalities and
       | intricacies. I'm kind of amazed that there's so much from that
       | era that remains in copyright.
        
       | horpia wrote:
       | Interactive Jaws poster from Back to the Future is here, just
       | click on it -> https://floor796.com/#b3l3,84,583
        
       | enjeyw wrote:
       | It feels to me that even ignoring copyright law, Kastel has a
       | limited claim to the credit here.
       | 
       | Art director Alex Gotfryd came up with the concept of the Shark
       | and the Swimmer, while Paul Bacon did the original drawing.
       | 
       | At this point what's to distinguish Kastel's painting of a shark
       | and a swimmer from anyone else making a painting of a shark and a
       | swimmer?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-06-20 23:00 UTC)