• @1stTime4MeInMCU
    link
    English
    1142 months ago

    Just don’t let studios take the tax write off and this is all fixed

    • @rdyoung@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1572 months ago

      I’ve seen others suggest that it gets surrendered to the public domain if they take the deduction. I’d be fine with that.

      • DarkGamer
        link
        fedilink
        42 months ago

        Wouldn’t that also put the characters into public domain like Wile E Coyote? I can’t imagine they’d do that for a tax write-off.

        • LanternEverywhere
          link
          fedilink
          442 months ago

          I don’t think so, the character wouldn’t be public domain, just the exact specific movie. So anyone could screen the movie, but people couldn’t make new works based on those characters.

        • chaogomu
          link
          fedilink
          142 months ago

          It wouldn’t necessarily.

          Basically, you’d say that this one work is copyright free, but any characters appearing in it would still have copyright under other works.

          The practical effect is that you’d be able to download this movie, watch it, share it, cut up bits and pieces and use them elsewhere, but any original works based on the characters would not be allowed due to those characters still being covered from other works.

          • DarkGamer
            link
            fedilink
            6
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Well that would be different from how it works with Mickey Mouse and Sherlock Holmes, in both of those examples, some works involving the character are public domain and others are still under copyright. As such, people can do their own versions of Mickey mouse as long as it’s the steamboat Willie version of Mickey mouse but not Mickey mouse from more recent works. People can write their own versions of Sherlock Holmes stories as long as they don’t have the characteristics of Sherlock Holmes in later novels.

            I suspect the same would apply to Wile E. Coyote if this film went into the public domain, people could use the character as long as it’s the version of the character from this movie and not the version from the '60s cartoons.

            • @MrMcGasion@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              62 months ago

              There was a weird situation with the movie “It’s a Wonderful Life” where the copyright to the movie lapsed into the public domain due to someone forgetting to renew it (when that was a thing), but the story, and characters were still protected. It was basically decided that the still frames were public domain, but since they became story in movie form, not just anyone could legally sell copies of the movie.

            • @Dieterlan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              32 months ago

              I think that only applies if you can make an argument that the two characters are distinct. Your Mickey/Steamboat Willie example is good because they are distinct (slightly different looks, and different names). Another good example is Sherlock Holmes. There was a big lawsuit where the current rights holders tried to argue that the later works are still under copyright just because Sherlock has emotions, and he didn’t in the earlier stories. I don’t remember how the suit turned out though.

        • @Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          No, just that one piece. Really, maybe there could be a second class of Public Domain where it free to share, but nobody can charge for a showing or access to.

    • FlumPHP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      352 months ago

      Yeah it’s a scam. They’ll claim they lost all the money that went into making the movie because no one would buy it for the price they wanted. If they’d sold it for the highest offer, they’d have lost less.

      How is that any different than burning down my own building and claiming it as a loss in my taxes?

      • @wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        182 months ago

        No, you put your building up for sale at an absurd amount, then when nobody is willing to pay you what you want for it, then you burn it down!

        Totally different and completely sane.

      • admiralteal
        link
        fedilink
        232 months ago

        There’s a great documentary on exactly this called The Producers.

    • @Lojcs@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      But they could still take the tax write off if it doesn’t sell, and they miss the chance it might

      This feels like money laundering or something to me