As we know from the US Constitution, copyright is permitted
This was supposed to be for limited Times, but Big Media corporations like Disney have managed to extend copyright terms continually. How are their efforts promoting the Progress of Science and useful Arts?
That’s right, the way for the new Disney Fairies franchise has been paved by Disney’s tireless efforts to secure endless copyright extensions. Limited copyright terms would conflict with their “Fairies” business plan:
Mr. Iger said he singled out the Fairies line as a potential blockbuster in part because longevity would not be reliant on the aging of human stars, as is the case with “Hannah Montana” or “High School Musical.”
“As everyone knows,” Mr. Iger said, “fairies are forever.” (link)
Unlike nasty ol’ human beings, who age, and nasty ol’ constitutional limits to copyright monopolies, today’s copyrights – and the Fairy Franchises they protect – are forever. Let’s hope that’s worth sacrificing freedom of expression for, ’cause this is what “culture” is going to look like for a long, long time.
Nice! And of course, let’s not forget that Disney’s fairies themselves are a kind of “derivative work”, drawn from European folk legends. Tinker Bell in particular began as a character in a play (and then a novel) by J. M. Barrie, in 1904 and 1911.
Good thing for Disney all that stuff isn’t under copyright…
Good thing for Disney all that stuff isn’t under copyright…
Disney wouldn’t care – they could afford to pay off anyone who claimed ownership of copyrights. Or sue them. That’s what copyright legislation is all about: freedom of expression for the fabulously wealthy (everyone else shut up and consume).
Tinkerbell used to be a sexy, ill-tempered bitch. In other words, kinda fun. This new one seems sweet as cotton candy. A fake!
Bet the old Tink is in a jar somewhere, waiting to be rescued!
Are you familiar with the Orphan Art Bill?
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h5889/show
http://www.printmag.com/design_articles/orphan_works/tabid/419/Default.aspx