Adam Ruins Everything - How Mickey Mouse Destroyed the Public Domain

[@1300mer]

Deadmau5 the DJ got sued by Disney for having a helmet that allegedly looked like Mickey Mouse. Ya... Disney lost that one too.

[@sillygoose635]

well it did

[@1d10tcannotmakeusername]

@@sillygoose635 You again. Are you Justin Y's annoying replacement?

[@sillygoose635]

@@1d10tcannotmakeusername are you life's annoying critic?

[@Triceijt]

I’m a dj. Hopefully I don’t get sued

[@1d10tcannotmakeusername]

@@sillygoose635 I guess we're conflicting amplitudes on the same frequency.

[@nathandrake3070]

And people complain pirating is the biggest issue

[@arfn1973]

Arrgh we pirate game, movie!

[@ghostbrigadiergeneral1261]

Ar give me your copy of black ops 2 now

[@_Tzer]

make it back to 20 years

[@neotheone5559]

Ya know let's restart the golden age of piracy ONE PIECE STYLE

[@unnamed1613]

♪ Do what you want cause a pirate is free. You are a pirate.♪

[@Doctor4077]

Fun fact: there is actually a company in Paraguay that uses Mickey Mouse's image as the face of their products. And if you're thinking that's just because Disney probably doesn't know about it, here's the thing: they do and they tried to sue the company. Best part? Disney actually LOST the case and that company continues to use Mickey's face in their products just out of spite

[@deanmenkis8037]

+Doctor4077 Really? How did they win it!

[@Doctor4077]

Emrakul because after Disney created Mickey but before he patented him, an italian immigrant who knew about it moved to Paraguay and registered Mickey under his name with the country's copyright laws, which allowed him and his family to keep the rights in the country as long as they renew the patents.

[@luxtenax9175]

+Doctor4077 Something similar happened in Mexico. A company used the face of Donald Duck as their logo, unfortunately, they did lost the case against Disney and had to re-design their mascot. It's still nice to hear from a company that did the same and succeeded though.

[@koshi6505]

+Doctor4077 So our hero is patent abuse in another country.

[@Doctor4077]

Brandon Pack yeah, wouldn't that make a great movie?

[@peascoutpesante9456]

Folklores, myths, fairytales, and stories of the ancient past: *exist* Disney: "hippity hoppity, that's now my property!"

[@SlapstickGenius23]

Sony: Spider Man can (temporarily) be allowed to meet up Disney’s Marvel gang. Disney: Heheheh, but Stan Lee sold the rest of Marvel to me!

[@antoniusevan3722]

@@SlapstickGenius23 Wonder how long will it take before Disney buyoff Sony.

[@sushoki._.reilin]

@@antoniusevan3722 infinity coz sony is Japanese No one buys the japan

[@bonedude666]

The public: "Say, you seem to make a lot of money off of these characters. How about you let us use some of _your_ characters?" Disney: *"No."*

[@sqoosh4121]

Romeo and Juliet *_TOKYO DRIFT_*

[@juanmanuelpenaloza9264]

Already called dibs.

[@dr.nosborn6330]

Yakuzas, extorision, illegal races and a love so profound that will change Japanese history. Stay on track!!!!! SUMMER 2021

[@gabesori667]

I'd see that movie.

[@promontorium]

@Irsyad Aman What? Fast and Furious 3 was released in 2006. To this day still the most accurate portrayal of life in Japan for Americans.

[@Azurade]

There’s actually something very similar already out. It’s about Romeo and Juliet being part of different gangs

[@ztslovebird]

I'd just like to point out that Walt Disney had been dead for decades when the Disney Company lobbied for changing the copyright laws.

[@sakiefox7250]

+ztslovebird He's talking about Walt Disney Studios

[@azbrowne]

So blame Michael Eisner!

[@sakiefox7250]

which is still walt disney studios.

[@ztslovebird]

***** Then why is the MAN Walt Disney cast as the villain, instead of Michael Eisner?

[@ThePeskyBug]

+ztslovebird Because he's the most recognizable human face for the company. How many people do you honestly think know the face of Michael Eisner or any other person of importance to the studio, aside from Walt himself. They may as well draw some random person from the TruTV staff, it'd have the same effect.

[@artistofcringealice3237]

1:06 I want them to make out. Shippers: We have taught him well.

[@depressedbreakfast2614]

Oh god it’s spreading!

[@mozart7074]

U mean rule 34?

[@haiironosora9714]

Sleeping beauty licking Paul bunyan's hairy gorgeous feet definitely has more of a rule 34 vibe to it than shipping lmao

[@N3verFam0us]

@@haiironosora9714 so glad I'm not the only one who saw that

[@blue_screen_bliss2334]

what kind sick child thinks of this?

[@JJNNZone]

This is why Steamboat Willie being Public Domain is great. We can finally give that mouse the treatment they deserve after making it hard for all of us

[@cartman_x_heidi_official]

I wish Fantasia Mickey was Public Domain. That would've been Awesome

[@gambler942]

​@@cartman_x_heidi_official fantasia for public Domain

[@mr.end-game711]

@@cartman_x_heidi_official nothing stoping you from making a wizard Micky, mind you have to be carful on how it looks so Disney's lawyers don't eat you alive.

[@zavidlan6166]

Copyright is such a mess, just like in KZbin

[@eventplanner461]

can someone pin this comment

[@dededeclobberkirb8014]

Zavid Lan So true

[@elisabethheiman2104]

BLAKE WALKER What? There's nothing legally wrong with fanart.

[@elisabethheiman2104]

Zavid Lan True, though I remember this one idiot kid put full episodes of the English dub of Future Diary on his KZbin channel, claimed that it was "fair use" while ironically monetizing the video, until Funimation found out and put a Copyright Claim on all his videos, causing KZbin to delete his channel. However, the majority of the time, it is really screwed up.

[@ms.watakamis947]

History repeats itself

[@barbaro267]

Hercules shouldn't be copyrighted because he's a mythological figure. Even Thor shouldn't be copyrighted for the same reason. That's like copyrighting the Great Spirit in Native American mythology, or wendigos.

[@fufutg9543]

Well, they're both Marvel characters now.

[@OriginalNeomoon]

And only the Marvel depiction is copyrighted by Marvel but not the character, this is how Image was able to release their own Thor comics in the 90s. Marvel owns the title "The Mighty Thor" so you can not release a different Thor comic with that name. However, you can release a comic called "The Unbreakable Thor" ... for the next 30 minutes until I copyright it.

[@CelioHogane]

They are not, only the marvel versions of those are.

[@yakasaibashir5846]

he is talking about mythological characters

[@txferretgirl]

they aren't, however the designs and stories that were added by disney's hercules or marvel's thor are. Because those are 'their' versions and are copywrited.

[@tobecontinued5290]

I remember when disney tried to copyright a holiday. It showed how power hungry that company is.

[@milcahreyes5287]

Yes, exactly! However the Mexican community was in an uproar about this thing, so the folks at Pixar decided to rename it COCO for less offense. And where did the title COCO come from? Of course, the protagonist's great-grandmother!

[@kramarancko1107]

Which holiday?

[@RM-56]

@@kramarancko1107 Probably dia de los muertos, based on the first comment

[@SlapstickGenius23]

Disney even tried to trademark a Swahili Greeting, known as Hakuna Matata.

[@flying_Night_slasher]

They tried to copyright Loki

[@Elizabeththegreatest]

Ah, Disney! Making the legal system work in it's favor since the late 90s!

[@AhkenAOK]

Better yet since the late 1890s

[@thatrandomguyontheinternet2477]

And don’t forgot making history work in its favor

[@JD_tcb]

Ah KZbin kids, re-stating what they just learned in the video like it's their own thought since the late 2000s.

[@Nick-du7cc]

@@JD_tcb ah J D what a potty mouth

[@JD_tcb]

@@Nick-du7cc ...huh?

[@Kyzoren]

"I want them to make out!" AND SO FAN FICTION WAS BORN!!!

[@Mercury_Poison]

so true

[@mayabellow4643]

and fanart:)

[@rourkey1555]

Q

[@dunn0r]

Fan fiction is fine anyway, as long as you don't make money out of it.

[@PJ-jb5bm]

IT LIVEEEEEESSSSSSSSS

[@turbonerdo6838]

If Disney hadn't held on to Mickey Mouse, Batman and Superman would both be in public domain. So it's disneys fault that Batman isn't in the MCU.

[@Danbo22987]

I mean, most of the MCU characters are only a few years away from the same treatment. So there is no reason Spider-man isn't in the DCEU

[@charlesburrows687]

+Team Kayako the point of the public domain is the creater has already profited handsomely from their work and most likely retired or past. If anything without having these works pass into the public domain, original ideas have become more stagnant.

[@charlesburrows687]

+Team Kayako haha it's all fan fiction unless the original person made it. It's a tricky subject because on one hand you will get alot of people trying to make something about some character and you'll get over saturated with it but in the otherhand you may get more interesting stories to begin with.

[@charlesburrows687]

+Team Kayako you say that because its licensed that makes it is not fan fiction? why? take the lord of the rings franchise for example wb owns the license to make the games. does that mean the games are canon. nope. It's fan fiction. Tolkien created a vast world that he poured his heart and soul into. now just because a faceless company is trying to make a quick buck by slapping the lotr name on it doesn't make it Canon. The funny thing is those fanfictions are still very enjoyable but still fan fiction. Also that 90 to 10 works for stuff you'd consider Canon :p back when the star wars eu was a thing I was reading a whole lot of crap...crap that still was enjoyable :p

[@innosam123]

Sometimes it is canon, as in the Star Wars EU (not anymore, but still), or in a separate, connected universe. Both pretty much never happen in fanfics.

[@D_Artella]

That kid just proved that you're never too young to be a shipper.

[@personman4523]

Linlee1000 Or develop a fetish...

[@FirstnameLastname-sb3hj]

@@personman4523 Goddamit

[@kagomehigurashi7455]

I'm a shipper i need a life

[@popeyespizza330]

I read that as stripper lol

[@samsonbadejo977]

Is that Isaac Ryan Brown?

[@susie1175]

After seeing Disney deny a grieving family of engraving spider man on their deceased son’s grave, this video speaks to me. Heck, I’ve always had a feeling that Disney was one of the main factors that made copyright such a pain in the ass

[@gandalflotr2898]

#resistcapitalism

[@victorchan8301]

​@@gandalflotr2898this is about the original definition of capitalism that means government by the rich Capitalist economic class, not free market which Pax Americana only support in name.

[@ShawnRavenfire]

Of course it did bite Disney in the ass, because MGM still owns the copyrights to their Wizard of Oz adaptation, which means that every time Disney does a version of the Wizard of Oz, they can't make it look too similar to the MGM version, which pisses Disney off. Yet when a school did a version of Beauty and the Beast that looked too similar to the Disney version, Disney threatened to sue them. Hypo-hypocritical.

[@silverdamascus2023]

Just a small correction, the MGM version of The Wizard of Oz is now owned by Warner Bros.

[@SlapstickGenius23]

@@silverdamascus2023 via Turner.

[@joes9954]

It's a good thing that NJ High School made their version of Alien when they did. Much later and Disney would have likely sued them before the end of act I.

[@kesslerine]

​@@silverdamascus2023since when?

[@silverdamascus2023]

@@kesslerine Since 1996, when they bought Turner. Also, it was in 1986 when Turner bought MGM, sold it back, but kept the rights to much of their library.

[@BreakerJackaltheChaosSource]

Who's watching this in 2024. When Mickey Mouse finally entered Public Domain and Disney finally couldn't Stop it.

[@Mster_J]

Disney responded and basically said they don’t care. It’s only steamboat Mickey. People acting like Disney just lost its lifeline 😂

[@brandoncoins8246]

No it’s not just steamboat Mickey it would actually be all Mickeys because how can you tell the difference between steamboat mickey and regular?

[@videon6134]

​@@brandoncoins8246because of the different designs they made later duh.

[@stevengrvp]

Yup finally is

[@yosefdemby8792]

@@brandoncoins8246 The eyes

[@Ice-yp4wg]

You thought that was bad. mention: *_ARTICLE 13_*

[@Pryexel]

I'm here because of it.

[@pjRaging]

I think its just all the companies pf the world being greedy and finding a way to make a quick buck because they want to steal it from any creator trying to make another good in this world

[@Pryexel]

@@pjRaging Actually, I think their just afraid of what the Pubic Domain would do to their precious characters.

[@pjRaging]

@@Pryexel i actually own way to much characters and their own stories for me im not afraid of people taking my characters and doing what ever they want with them cause its something that makes me feel glad someone like my character enough to use them but if someone does something like call out this is mine obviously i would have proof to show i own them and even have the support of other creators to help shame that person for stealing something which is evidently own to someone else. We as a community of the internet have pride with content we create and we share it among each other but with copy rights such as this its different cause they pay for the rights of that character even though its not theirs and force us to go ok i guess its urs now and i can't use that anymore. Cause we fear to be sued for something obviously ours. And thats a fact

[@MrWatch-xy7hx]

What's that?

[@johnnyenglish1043]

« I want them to make out » « Ooh yeah let’s see that » *Welcome to Rule 34*

[@screm1471]

Where is the wikihow on rolling your own neck

[@whale21100]

Funny note, one of the largest owners of rule 34 porn is Disney itself. All animators for Disney sign a contract saying that while they work at Disney any creative art, characters, animation, etc. they created while employed with Disney becomes Disney property. Naturally a lot of the animators employed there are not super happy with this, in retaliation they started drawing all kinds of porn of Disney characters and their original characters, which of course Disney didn't want to leak to the public so they claimed it and locked it away. So in the vaults of the Disney corporation is a practical mountain of 100% official Disney-certified porn.

[@sweetiethelion3430]

bigwhale21 I wanna die rn 😭😭😭😭 well its disney...... yeeeeee ^•^

[@benfrank9622]

The hidden Treasure of Disney?

[@basian7365]

i think i lost count of how many pics and animations of the characters Nani Pelekai , Pocahontas, Jasmine,... ive seen on Rule 34 XD

[@dragonmaster613]

Mickey is so iconic that even if he went public domain, Disney could still be recognized as the original creator. THAT is what copyright was for. Also, this is what happens in a capitalist system where a corporation outlives its founder.

[@20035079]

even on public domain tapes back in the day, when they put the only few looney tunes cartoons on them, they still retained the warner brothers logos on them

[@brycelahm1283]

I love Disney

[@ArmelOenn]

Just like anything from the past. You know the 9th symphony is from Beethoven, but you still can use it or remix it now in whatever form you wish and you still would recognize the music and its author. So that doesn't justify Disney's greed.

[@brycelahm1283]

Armel Oenn Who cares? I don’t care if Disney wants to keep what’s theirs. I love Disney and everything they do

[@RubberyCat]

Actually, that is not the original goal of Capitalism. To say that is the same thing as claiming that Communism or Socialism leads to everything being State-owned.. Neither are true if you understand why the ideologies were created. Thinking of it, "Public Domain" is probably a Capitalist concept to begin with, but even if it isn't, what Disney and the lot has done by expanding their IP ownership time, do NOT have its basis in Capitalism, but in Authoritarianism. Capitalism, as well as Communism, has its roots in Liberal ideas and ideals. (So does Anarchy, by the way.) However, throughout the time, both Capitalism and Communism has frequently gotten affected, and used together with Authoritarian ideas, in the case of Communism leading to the "communism" of the Soviet Union, China and ... such, whereas Capitalism used with Authoritarian concepts leads to Monopolies and Oligopols (a few corporations that together has monopoly). Both situations are an anathema to the originally Liberal views and tenements of Capitalism and Communism. Now, i know that a certain amount of Authoritarianism is needed as well, but so is Liberalism. We have to find out what combinations work, and _where_ they work. One place or situation works better if more Liberal, another if more Authoritarian, yet another if more Communist and a fourth if more Capitalist. Heck, a few places are best off with Anarchy. Thing is, the ideas and ideals blend into each other, one may argue that something is communist, liberal or capitalist ... and all three are correct! So the question is more about systems, like the concepts of Public Domain, Intellectual Property, Ownership and so on. Right now, PERSONAL Ownership of Intellectual Property needs to get enforced at the cost of CORPORATE Ownership getting lessened, as does Public Domain need to get enforced, Also at the cost of Corporate Ownership getting lessened.

[@silverdamascus2023]

One thing that people often forget, copyright laws in USA used to have a renewal option, copyright lasted 28 years, but you could ask for 28 more, most people didn't come back to renew because they either died or didn't care, this allowed older works of media that are still being used and are still making money to keep being protected by copyright, while media works that are not being used for anything and aren't making any money to be free for everyone to use. When Disney and other movie and music companies wanted longer copyrights, instead of asking for the option of renewing twice or thrice, they killed the renewal option, it means that even media works that are in risk of becoming lost media due to being out of distribution are still copyrighted for 95 years.

[@KaosNova2]

But the other part is the fact that other people or companies can buy your copyright thus having it for themselves. In the USA under out laws anyways

[@vincegiangiulio1160]

One notable example is Paramount’s Fleischer Studios. Outside of Popeye/Betty Boop, much of their cartoon output outside those two icons are in public domain. That includes the 2nd animated American full length film ever Gulliver’s Travels. Plus much of the successor Famous Studios cartoons are in public domain. Thanks to these copyright lapses after 28 years, in the early ‘90’s if you watch Shining Time Station outside of Thomas & Friends, they had a musical segment in the form of the Anything Tunnel, Magic Bubble or Nicklelodeon machine, excerpts of these public domain cartoons are featured as the song was sung.

[@Earl_Black]

Let me fix the title. "How Disney Destroyed The Public Domain."

[@SlapstickGenius23]

The title is more like How Disney impacts the Public Domain.

[@Blueravenclaw13]

Well Micky mouse enters the public domain in 2024 last time I checked

[@josephcalabrese6337]

@@Blueravenclaw13 And somehow they'll find a way to mess that up too.

[@Blueravenclaw13]

@@josephcalabrese6337 yeah makes sense

[@SlapstickGenius23]

Ironically, even if the EU governments are in some ways influenced a lot by Disney in terms of extending copyright, they instead have the at times controversial if pretty boring life of the creator + 70 years, thus they in turn influenced America to extend copyright for almost all the fairly recent works available, an intention which later got hijacked a lot by Disney, much to the disdain of the general public at the time when most of us in the world didn’t have the net yet! However, Mexico perhaps has it much worse.

[@shinygrowlithe3882]

Adam Ruins Everything: Nothing will enter the Public Domain until 2019 Artist in 2018: ONE MORE YEAR

[@WaffleCat3367]

ok

[@shinygrowlithe3882]

@@WaffleCat3367 I forgot about this xD

[@togedemarusiridescence7219]

What happened? I'd like to read about that.

[@Faith-lj4ex]

This is the main reason why we can't use fan characters

[@vanquishelite9256]

Faith Jones Yea I hate it when fan made sonuc characters say "Do not steal" *sigh* so unfair jk those are pretty freaking weird.

[@Faith-lj4ex]

This is we gotta make our own stuff but just think about it if it wasn't for this copyright extension, our characters would be part of the Disney universe

[@willlyon7129]

Faith Jones Or the public domain.

[@cooldude56g]

Planning on making an animated franchise somewhere down the line. Before I die, I'm going to make sure that my characters cross into the public domain.

[@TheCanterlonian]

you are the coolest dude ever!

[@diegoantoniorosariopalomin4977]

suscribed

[@RoyalKnightVIII]

cooldude56g Admirable but still legally difficult. there isn't a way to simply release something anymore because of moral rights.since it's basically automatic you never know who can sue. try looking into the creative commons licenses

[@coolspace3078]

how do you plan on doing that?

[@franklinfalco9069]

I hope no one uses them to sell alcohol or cigarettes to children.

[@ItsJr]

Came back to say that we won, Steamboat Willie Mickey is now in the public domain

[@randot6675]

Time won, we didn't. Not until the laws are revised to return the copyright duration to what it should've been: half a century

[@yosefdemby8792]

@@randot6675 Actually, it was 56 years.

[@mariobroultimate1808]

Yeah, we got Mickey like we should have a long time ago. But copyrights are still stuck at lasting 96 years. Because of this change, I'll have to wait until I'm an old fart to start seeing video games join the public domain.

[@randot6675]

@@yosefdemby8792 that's about half a century

[@yosefdemby8792]

@@randot6675 But not exact

[@pgj1997]

Thankfully, the copyright extension act ended in 2019, so now stuff can enter the public domain again. Oh, and also, there was this court case where a guy tried to claim rights to a picture a monkey took with his camera, but since the monkey was the one who took the photo, it _technically_ isn't his. So they ruled that any photo taken by an animal immediately falls in the public domain. Look it up.

[@ftferlo8868]

Why did it end

[@rokamayono2312]

@@ftferlo8868 cause everyone got fed up I’m assuming.

[@RGC_animation]

Haha.. oh I've got bad news for you...

[@silentwalker434]

@@RGC_animation What happened ?

[@RGC_animation]

@@silentwalker434 Mickey Mouse is gonna be copyrighted until 2024 now for some reason.

[@AngryNerdBird]

One correction I want to make: Steamboat Willie was originally supposed to enter public domain in 1984, not 1998. in 1976 (10 years after Walt died) the Disney company extended the 1984 date more years to 1998.

[@Superjump100]

literally 1984

[@petermmm42]

@@Superjump100 you're not wrong, it was entering the public domain in 1984

[@aaronlane8276]

now it’s set to expire in 2024

[@albertosaurschannel6946]

@@aaronlane8276 6 more months and that mouse is ours. There is nothing that Disney can do.

[@leoarevalo6786]

​@@albertosaurschannel6946unless they somehow renew it again

[@FizzleFX]

*and now they kill star wars , pixar AND their own classic movies with 'real life remakes'... good job*

[@CyberLance26]

Marvel was also way better before Disney got them.

[@ChickyBoyEntertainment]

Not to mention the Muppets!

[@thefiregodzapp]

CyberLance26 if marvel was way better without Disney why was it going bankrupt?

[@thefiregodzapp]

CyberLance26 star wars wasn't doing much better see the prequel trilogy. the only thing keeping the franchise afloat was the games and books. now we just got the books because of ea.

[@RubberyCat]

@@CyberLance26 Marvel actually are unaffected, the problem we see with Marvel today started being an issue years before Disney bought them.

[@visionarylocomotiveworks9703]

Hypo-hypo-hypo-hypocritical!

[@Morec0]

+MeganekkoFury1126 I want a full version of that remix NOW!

[@bijanghamami6621]

There is 69 likes now

[@thewanderingcreative7173]

Pig power in the Hey-Ouse!!!!!!!

[@god1673]

+Bijan Ghamami 2k dumbass!

[@Morec0]

***** Yaaaaaay!

[@1996koke]

Anyone else watching this clip after Mickey entered the public domain

[@mr.x8259]

Yup.

[@eb2k445]

Me!!!

[@sianduckfield7222]

me

[@babygirl33829]

SOO basically Walt Disney was the kid on the play playground that wanted to keep his toys and yours even when he put them down

[@FxBrour]

More like the the Kid died and his Parents sued everybody that wanted to play with the Toys of their dead son.

[@rhombicosidodecahedron4821]

But it wasn’t actually Walt Disney. He was dead when the company extended their ownership

[@FireBlastStudios]

Walt Disney was already long dead.

[@zepaduse97]

Walt disney would hate how disney has become now

[@pinhead35]

Walt Disney was long dead when the company lobbied to extend copyrights

[@MetalSonicReject]

Just to clarify, Adam is referring to -Walt- Disney the company, not the man who made Mickey. This a simple case of corporate greed. Also, isn't the copyright law 75 years before entering public domain?

[@Deathnotefan97]

75 years now (I think it's 120 years if owned by a company, don't know the details) I think the 56 years was before it was changed

No, it's lifetime of the author + 70 years after death.

[@420Mouse]

And there's still a lot of loopholes now, including the copyright can pass to the offspring even if not directly stated in a will. It's crap.

[@mibdev]

It's lifetime of the author, plus an added... 70 or 75 years, don't know which one. To be honest, their lifetime is plenty. But IMHO, works already copyrighted should remain so till their current copyright experiation date is reached. New works, however, should (as of [some date]) get the old/a shorter expiration date. This would allow Disney to thrive for what is still, a very, very long time, but in the meantime semi fix the CP laws. Or, you could go for the alternative of doing the same as above, except every 5 or so years, the expiration length would get shorter, until we reach a reasonable amount. We might need to (slowly) raise it in the far away future, as life expectancy is getting lengthier. Or not, but this might just piss off some artists who would find themselves digging up old laws. Anyway, that's just my opinion.

[@saoirsecameron]

I personally think copyright should only last as long as it takes for someone to earn retirement benefits. Something like 20-30 years depending on your career. Unless people receive stock options or pensions, nobody expects to continue earning profits after they stop working, why should intellectual property be any different?

[@333angeleyes]

That kid was a surprisingly good actor for his age

[@Kevin_A]

That actor was a surprisingly good kid for his age

[@JW-do2wc]

Good news. Mickey Mouse will be in the public domain in 2024.

[@anton.s6882]

Specifically Steam Boat Willy, not Mickey Mouse the Mascot. And yes there's a difference, you can Look it up online with discussion about this

[@licktin1091]

Steamboat Willy is now in the public domain. These copyright laws are ridiculous

[@mr_indie_fan]

Everything from the 30s to the 60s should already be in the public domain by now according to public domain laws before disney was involved. Which includes spiderman and probably a ton of other older marvel characters. We desperately need a repeal on disney change of copyright law.

[@nathanseper8738]

It's a damn shame. Who knows what kind of cultural renaissance we could've had.

[@jeffreygao3956]

I will gladly do so and shrink the term of copyright but I and I alone will be Kaiser!

[@tylere.8436]

I personally think it should be 25 years.

[@virgilhodgesjr1524]

​@@tylere.8436 that's too short. Even as the Stones are proving, 60 is too short. So, I'd set it at 75 years for all media. That's books, film, sound recordings. Doing that would mean the first Elvis songs would hit public domain in 2032. It also wasn't just Disney arguing for an extension. I believe the estate of George Gershwin also were concerned about his songs entering public domain.

[@NoomEnihsDrop]

​@@virgilhodgesjr1524with how long humans already live for now and are (hopefully) going to continue to live even longer healthier and happier lives as the future goes on. Copyright ***especially*** shouldn't last a super extended period of time. 56 years is a perfectly acceptable amount of time. It's far longer than the initial 12 years the law was when it was first created, but it's also not too long to where when it's public domain basically everyone has completely forgotten about it. Like.... Aside from major cartoon buffs and fans of Old School Works. Do many people in the mainstream today care about or even know who characters like Oswald The Rabbit, Felix the Cat, or Popeye The Sailor even *are*? No we *should* have gotten Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Tom and Jerry, and stuff more akin to Modern Classics by now. But that's thanks to corporations twisting the law into their hands, not the other way around.

[@Ridlinrin]

And with all their remakes, they're at it again. Everyone's busy being mad about the casting, and I'm over here like "our overlord has found a way to extend their copyright again!!" Smh

[@magic75450]

I'm not sure if that's how it works. I think by the time the original Lion King would enter the public domain, people would be free to use the original film and story as they wish, BUT they can't use the changes that Disney made in the remake.

[@flying_Night_slasher]

@@magic75450 but if they barely change anything then it's a way to bypass the system

[@LordMoonshadowGaGa]

Gil Abramovich Actually, that is how it works. It’s a lovely little loophole that allows Disney to extend copyright as the live action films can be considered a “wholly unique medium”, which gives them legal right to claim them as a new interpretation.

[@flying_Night_slasher]

@@LordMoonshadowGaGa yeah like I said it's a way to bypass the system

[@andmos1001]

But here is the legal arguments for this: Creating a new design based on the old design, the old design is still under public domain

[@cianreal]

"I want them to make out." Absolutely yes.

[@Despot_janny]

now you can in rule 34

[@cianreal]

Precisely.

[@TrashPenguin80]

Well Mickey is in the public domain now folks, although it’s not the modern version which we will wait 11 years to get there, truly a time to wait.

[@yosefdemby8792]

Actually, we only have to wait 10 years.

[@AdamYJ]

The sad thing is that Disney didn't have to do it. Characters don't get copyrighted, stories, songs and other works do. Characters exist under trademark, which lasts as long as someone uses a character. It was the cartoon Steamboat Willie that was going to enter the public domain. A cartoon that no one would really want to rip off today anyway.

[@kesslerine]

Exactly. There's a difference between a copyright and a trademark.

[@katierodrigo5893]

Actually, you’d be surprised at how many people seized the opportunity to use steamboat Willie

[@tripleO16]

rich people and politicians ruin everything

[@years8809]

@The RPGAdventurer Um actually, it is the rich people who came up with the idea. And they just mass produced them.

[@FxBrour]

@@years8809 Na they just financed it and in most cases not even that, most technological innovations like smart phones computers etc. where financed by the government. Think what we could do if some greedy Schmocks wouldn´t evade taxes worth billions of dollars

[@Rao665]

@@FxBrour actually they're right....they might not have been rich prior, but they became rich for a reason. Walt Disney a good example. Henry Ford another. In order to make MORE money...you hire people to help...eventually they turn into employees and the creator washes his hands of all the grunt work...while becoming even more rich. Lawyers and those that think in legal terms ruin everything.

[@mineminecraftlp4593]

*cough* *cough* *S O C I A L I S M*

[@belindacrawford8263]

Truest thing I've heard all week!

[@11mrpineapple]

1:10 Jekyll and Hyde are making out.... Is that narcissism?

[@tomlxyz]

+ExplodingOctopus They are not the same but opposites. That doesn't fit narcissism.

[@madsaintjames]

+ExplodingOctopus I think that's almost like masturbation

[@KiraldoTheGreat]

It's selfcest, know your fanfic terms. :)

[@1098234567]

+ExplodingOctopus At it's finest good sir......At it's finest.

[@bananawolf6417]

yee

[@franklinfalco9069]

When I was a lad I corrected four dozen misconceptions every morning to help me get large. And now that I'm grown I correct five dozen misconceptions so I'm roughly the size of a barge.

[@MetalSonicReject]

Now I want to see Adam Ruin Anime. Bring up the flaws of the anime industry.

[@CHAlDAN]

It would be a three hour long video.

[@1mattzone]

It would honestly probably be on how animators are severely underpaid and overworked in alot of cases. The rest are just hyperbole or people not understanding.

[@Nazareadain]

Why get Adam? /watch?v=izBUPZ3yjpU

[@SpaceDetectiveTravis]

Not gonna lie I wanna see that too.

[@MetalSonicReject]

MeGusta GameStation Woah, not all of anime is garbage. That's just what you mostly see from the industry; overused tropes and whatnot. There is some anime that is worth watching (DBZ, One Piece, My Hero Academia, Overlord, Danganronpa 3, etc.). You just have to dig deep for those diamonds in the rough.

[@SawtoothWaves]

Because Mickey Mouse is the symbol of a still thriving company, it makes sense that Disney should continue to own that character. It gets out of hand when they get to protective, like the time they sued Deadmau5.

[@SawtoothWaves]

*too protective. Oops.

[@MrNateSPF]

+The Brony Notion But Disney will continue to own those characters as long as the use them, because they are also Trademarked (which is different than Copyright and perpetual).

[@SawtoothWaves]

+MrNateSPF I don't know much about copyright law, thanks for explaining that.

[@furdfelmer4359]

+MrNateSPF I get what you are saying about "ownership", but your "Trademarked" reference and it being "perpetual", in my view, is nothing more than a legal monopoly. I have concerns when any company, grows to such extreme power, wealth and influence through the use of a monopoly or Trademarked product. This is a form of tyranny that suppresses the expression of products or ideals that threatens the greedy motives of those who invented the Trademarked system in the first place. If you look at the historical elements invoked in the crafting of Trademarked laws, it's clear this process was pushed and enacted by the "Robber Barons" of the past. Like much of what we have come to accept or been taught, the truth, is rarely, if ever exposed.

[@MrNateSPF]

Furd Felmer It seems that you are also mixing up Trademark and Copyright. While I would agree it is ridiculous how long Copyright protection has been extended. Trademarks were always intended to help businesses protect their brand, as long as they are in business. The Mickey Mouse icon is synonymous with the Disney brand. It is just odd to say that a company has a monopoly over their own business.

[@recorder9art]

Guys if more works entered the public domain, we would have more works such as RWBY and the Lunar Chronicles that have characters based off of fairy tales and of history. The public domain doesn't cause people to steal ideas but to expand or add on to them. Take the Red vs. Blue series as an example, Red vs. Blue is a show within the Halo universe but doesn't have characters from the Halo series but are original and has it own story completely different from the main plot of the Halo series. Both generally share the concept of war and a special program involved in it but the approaches are different. I'm pretty sure the Halo series are NOT in the public domain but the company, Bungie allowed the company Rooster Teeth, the ones who created the Red vs. Blue series to continue. That's what the public domain is supposed to do; it provides a foundation for artists, authors, and scientists to use to input their creativity or version onto an existing work as long they don't copy or steal directly from the original work. Warm Bodies, Gnomeo and Juliet, West Side Story are retellings of Romeo and Juliet RWBY, the Lunar Chronicles, Once Upon a Time are adaptations of fairytales in different settings The Percy Jackson and the Heroes of Olympus series were based off of Greek and Roman gods along with their history Because new work hasn't entered the public domain, many were force to be original as possible to prevent legal battles forcing those to be very protective of their work, believing their work is being copied off. There had been so many ridiculous legal battles in recent years like with that lady who sued Disney for believing that they copied from her book to make Frozen, even though the only similarities were generally vague and basic things like how both involved sisters. I understand if people don't want others ruining their work but its not just original concepts but also music and scientific research that aren't allowed in the public hands and can't be used, especially scientific research, if we fix the problem.

[@jkseraphim4]

Wow I never knew that! That was very informative information! Thank you!

[@Baraborn]

I mean... I'm going to let you finish, but RWBY is a sh*t show.

[@Javetts]

yeah, RWBY had good fights and some great weapon design... and that's it. roosterteeth seems to be a huge group of parasites that sucked money from Monty and now that he's gone, they can't make anything worth watching. the original 2 seasons with Monty were bad too though. Using the "we villains are eventually gonna do some bad stuff" mystery they had going, was dragged out too long and seemed to be more because the writing staff hadn't decided on what the plot was yet then anything else. RWBY is all style and no substance. I pity anyone who honestly think RWBY is a good show. what shitty anime have you been watching? SAO?

[@0011peace]

Not really fairy tales most of the are already PD. You can write anything you w3ant about Hercules as long as it doesn't work off copy righted work. If you wanted top maker an original story where Hercules is black go right ahead also there is fair use doctrine and parody exceptions

[@jesterlefae3940]

Dude, you just a subscriber with your choice of references ALONE!

[@sloppyflyer7186]

Disney can’t stop us now, Steamboat Willie is finally public domain

[@dison7608]

2:04 It's 2019 now Disney. BRING BACK THE PUBLIC DOMAIN! Edit: 69 LIKES!?

[@brycelahm1283]

Martin Pintèr Terrible idea

[@GlaciusTS]

It is back, the public domain is in place now and more properties are becoming public domain, and unless Disney can Lobby again, Mickey will be Public Domain. I hope it does, the existence of the public domain protects artists and creators from getting sued from every direction. Literally everything has been done from some angle at this point. Copyright is too strong in terms of shelf life. Once I am dead, nobody should own the things I created. Give them a few years to prepare for the loss of that IP and then let the world have it.

[@throwawayacc1492]

HELLS YEAH

[@michaelconrad4541]

Micky doesn’t enter public domain till 2024

[@dison7608]

Wait. Mickey Mouse was created in 1928 and we need 100 years, right? That means we have to wait until 2028

[@mightymagnus]

We need to reform Copyright....

[@YellowBoysyt]

We need to reform alot of things.

[@Fazzel]

Problem is big companies own the politicians so who is there to reform it?

[@starwarfan8342]

mightymagnus true...but this isn't exactly number one on the list of priorities.

[@azoocola1064]

Big companies might own the politicians but they don't own us. We have the true power, never forget that. They only have as much power as they do because they can convince you that you are weak. But you have to believe that.

[@Brandino73]

Probably the only way to do that is to boycott the companies by not buying their products to make them bankrupt and then they’ll sell or I guess give away the characters back to the public domain.

[@GolyGolyGosh]

“I wanna make them make out” “Oooo yea let’s see that” 👌😂 amazing

[@depressedfrog4208]

And thus r34 was born

[@RedX03]

1:38 fear not Mickey your free now

[@chazzywaz]

Would the coloured posters for the animation count as being in the public domain or do copyright rules just see it as invalid and sue-able?

[@RedX03]

@@chazzywaz as one video I saw recounts we’re gonna need a sacrificial lamb to ultimately get the answer for that

[@1andonlyzara]

If they want Mickey Mouse, I don't see that much problem with it. But did they have to get such a chokehold on him that we can't even say his name on KZbin without Disney lawyers taking all our content away?

[@RyuSpike]

To think that this all happened because Universal held the rights to Disney's character Oswald the Lucky Rabbit. Understandably, Disney did what he can to make sure Mickey remains his. In doing so, however, the public domain had to suffer.

[@1andonlyzara]

***** Walt Disney didn't do it. His nephew did.

[@RyuSpike]

Is that right? Mind sharing the details?

[@1andonlyzara]

... Share the details? Adam said Mickey was gonna go into the public domain in 1998 and then the Disney company grabbed the government by the balls and had them destroy the public domain. Good ol' Uncle Walt died in 1966! Even his grandchildren had grandchildren by 1998! I don't need to share the details!

[@RyuSpike]

Went back and watched the vid, and sure enough he did say 1998. So yeah. I totally flopped there. If I didn't overlook that date, I wouldn't have assumed Disney did it himself.

[@Genedide]

Anyone else here to talk about how Mikey can now be seen launching himself off the ground by having projectile diarrhea, and Disney can’t sue?

[@HealthGage0336]

That's oddly specific

[@pass9786]

"I want them to make out" *sees King Midas on top of Moby Dick's forehead kissing him*

[@toxicgamer612]

fanart taken to far

[@tidiestspy1374]

I’m glad I remembered this video because it helped me understand the length of copyright better than my textbook of media. Thanks Adam!

[@ahmedyassin9636]

. they always find a way to change the laws for their own interest :(

[@politicallyunreliable4985]

+YHA SHOW Welcome to corporate America!

[@ahmedyassin9636]

+Jefe von Q well, I don't live in America :)

[@politicallyunreliable4985]

YHA SHOW That's the great thing, you don't have to! If you have ANYTHING of value, even just a poor population, it will come to (for?) you. Good luck.

[@jaypritchett6846]

A lot of people need to realize/remember that "Disney" and "Walt Disney" are 2 different things... Walt Disney was an incredible man with an AMAZING imagination! “All our dreams can come true, if we have the courage to pursue them.” -Walt Disney But Disney is a company that ended up being owned by greedy and horrible people :( “I only hope that we never lose sight of one thing, that it was all started by a mouse.” -Walt Disney

[@TheNinetySecond]

+Jay Mills Walt Disney was heavily influenced by a bunch of succesful copyrighted characters when he made Mickey Mouse. He also monopolized public domain fairy tales by creating an adaptation of them, and then copyrighting these adaptations, making it much harder for people in the future to make adaptations of these classic stories. Apart from that, he was a raging sexist and racist, and he crushed the competition of other artists, even the ones that later stole from, in order to build a monopoly in Hollywood. Walt Disney was a horrible man, and most, if not all of his work was laready made by others.

[@stickguy6673]

Wait you couldn't copyright hercules hes from greek mythology

[@maazkalim]

Bless the Turner® - the company, nothing to do with Mr Ted!

[@JR-ju3kj]

Well, yes and no. You technically can-but it would have to be your own specific version of the character. For example, Disney has their version of Hercules copyrighted. Marvel Comics also have their version of Hercules copyrighted(just as they do their version of Thor from Norse mythology). Hercules from Greek mythology is solidly in the public domain so if someone wanted to use Hercules for something, they're free to do so, it just couldn't bear any closeness in terms of similarities to established and copyrighted versions of Hercules.

[@scottiejerwinabejuela4973]

That's a yes and no, and not just hercules from Disney there's also Troy from Warner Bros. where some of the sequences are not exactly from the book of Homer's The Illiad, it's an original version from their company which they mention it from their credits 'inspired by' Homer's The Illiad.

[@koalafromtomorrow5656]

Wasn't Hercules also in the Percy Jackson or Zeus

[@nutellayummers]

Yeah that’s a yes and no, Disney’s Hercules isn’t even accurate to Greek Mythology, Hercules is the Roman hero the Greek one that should’ve been in the Disney movie was Heracles. And Megaera was actually killed along with their two kids by Heracles themself after Hera drove him crazy. So, with this misinformation Disney shown Hercules isn’t really related to Heracles. Sure they have similar stories, but Disney’s movie was so inaccurate to the real myth, Disney’s Hercules is his own character.

[@cross172]

Mark your calendars, boys and girls! Mickey Mouse enters the public domain January 1st, 2024!!!

[@msolito17]

That is like three years from now

[@cross172]

@@msolito17 Check your math, friend. It’s not even two…

[@ranelgallardo7031]

It happened

[@yaritzaperezsantiago6349]

Today is January 2nd 2024. Yesterday, Mickey Mouse entered the public domain after 95 years. So basically, this video is shitposting me.

[@NychusX]

1:07 IT'S FANFUCTION! RUN!!!

[@NychusX]

that's a typo but damn does it fit well.

[@commode7x]

I like fanfucktion

[@somestrawberry2262]

NychusX No. Don't run. Embrace it.

[@christianm.k.3347]

I wish more people knew about this. Disney is basically everything that’s wrong with the entertainment industry today. And yes, that’s very ironic coming from someone who subscribes to Disney+….

[@cgimichaelmyers2806]

Now people will with Mickey Mouse finally entering the public domain.

[@Lynxan]

The funny thing is that not every version of Mickey Mouse would be in the public domain. First it would be the rubberband version seen in the earlist days. Each time they redesigned him resets the copywrite, at least to that look of him. This is similar to how, let's say, Beauty and the Beast as a story is in the public domain, but make a movie that looks too much like Disney's version and they can sue or Wizard of Oz is in public domain, but make a version with ruby slippers and your in trouble (the real story has silver slippers), though there's another one that should be public domain too.

[@KaosNova2]

If the Ruby slippers are Ruby Slippers in the book, then no, it’s public domain. The Seven Dwarves are named specifically in the Disney film, not the fairy tale, meaning that if anyone wants to make a Snow White film, then the outfits on the dwarves and the naming of the dwarves of you ever named them specifically at all would be different. But otherwise, details of what’s written in the Grimm fairy tale would be public domain. The black and white steamboat Willy design was used in several animated shorts including steamboat Willy, but the actual official iconic Mickey Mouse has been the colored Mickey Mouse with actual eyes and the red overalls since the 1940s. They wouldn’t be losing much from him being public domain.

[@starwarlover1016]

Guess what! Mickey is finally in the public domain

[@AngryNerdBird]

FYI Disney's copyrights being extended is not hypocritical, because Walt Disney had nothing to do with it. He was long dead by 1998. That's all on Eisner and the other folks running the company at the time.

[@DemagogueBibleStudy]

It doesn't matter if Walt had nothing to do with it. The point is that the COMPANY owes it's success to the public domain.

[@AngryNerdBird]

I am aware of this.

[@Edbrad]

They're saying it's hypocritical because they're saying Steamboat Willy being based on Steamboat Bill is the same as someone using Mickey Mouse as a character. I don't know anything about Steamboat Bill so I don't know how valid that is, probably not going by some other things Adam has said...

[@DemagogueBibleStudy]

No, you're completely missing the point. Disney owes it's success to stories like Snow White, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Peter Pan, Pinocchio, Alice in Wonderland, The Ice Queen, etc. etc. etc. none of which were original, but were adapted from the public domain.

[@robbiewalker2831]

1:25 - 1:40: If the video said 1998, then wouldn't it be the *Disney Company*, and not Walt himself?

[@Em-ih5du]

I get that Disney would want to retain the rights to Mickey. They're still using him. The law worked well before corporations. Like they said in the video, the old law existed so that people would make enough profit during their lifetime. As for corporations, they can exist forever so their lifetime don't really enter in account. Instead of single rule for EVERY and ANY type of work, why can't it simply work like a contract that'd you have to renew? Every 50 years, you'd have to renew your claim if you wanted to. If you were dead and couldn't renew it, then that'd be that. That would allow corporations to keep using their work while at the same time freeing some lone artist or scientist's work to the public domain. That could be a nice compromise.

[@TheWeepingDalek]

they can still use him.

[@kazoie1]

That still doesn't solve the problem brought up though. if you could just renew the license that's still halting them from becoming public domain and thus disallowing us to build on it. because honestly why wouldn't a company hold on to all of their licenses in this scenario just incase they could make a quick buck down the line.

[@Em-ih5du]

Never said it would. What this video explained is that the new extension prevents ANYTHING from entering the public domain since the time limit is so long. And in a way, it makes sense for a company to want to hold to their material if they're still using it. My suggestion is kind of a middle ground. But let's say that Disney has licenses for Mickey and Donald Duck. They have licenses for both and they're about to expire. For some reason, Donald isn't really popular anymore but Mickey still is. They decide to let go of Donald Duck and it enters the public domain. Now, let's say you're an other studio that made a very short lived yet very popular tv series in your young days. It's been decades since you've expended on this series and its characters. The license is up and since you're not planning to do anything with it anytime soon and moved on to other things, you decide to let it go. (*whispers* FIREFLY)

[@innosam123]

But they can't make money off him, at least nowhere near as easily.

[@innosam123]

Like trademarks?

[@charliestrain4586]

Who’s here after Mickey entered public domain

[@liammcnicholas918]

Just Mickey’s appearance in Steamboat Willie

[@uikmnhj4me]

This hits me like an essay without a concluding paragraph

[@JimBeamFiend53]

Goddamn it disney !! is there no end to your evil!?

[@IdeaBox-dk5vj]

(1.25 Years Later) "BREAKING NEWS! Disney Acquires FOX"

[@RichardX1]

Corporations can hoard copyrighted intellectual properties because they can theoretically exist forever. They might not die. And that's why a corporation is NOT a person!

[@shawnschaitel8446]

LMFAO all a corporation is a company or in most cases a group of people authorized to act as a single entity and recognized as such in local,state and federal law. and thus they are legally considered a "person" basically the only what for corporation not to be person would be to repeal all law related to incorporation and/or pass an amendment to the constitution

[@aaronlane8276]

Hopefully in 2024 Mickey Mouse should finally enter the Public Domain.

[@CMBGAMER2018TV]

And it did!

[@maxxgunner5573]

Adam is the we need and deserve. We need smart and snarky knights like him in this country and in the world.

[@TheTerribleTy]

I might need more DJ OinkZ in my life...

[@SnowyOwlKonnen]

There is something that he forgot to mention during this video is that Mickey Mouse, like all major Disney characters, is also trademarked, which lasts in perpetuity as long as it continues to be used commercially by its owner.

[@SlapstickGenius23]

The Disney versions of both Mowgli and Tarzan are also trademarked, so are the Disney Princesses.

[@batman88891]

Come on Adam. Calling Frankenstein's Monster "Frankenstein"?

[@Tyronejizz]

well he doesnt write the script. mabutu ruins adam ruins everythin

[@izunahosaki6133]

+Mabutu Obama whyyyyy....whyyyyy

[@beesonkawasabacardi]

+batman88891 I hate this so much, what a stupid nit-picking thing to care about. People just spout this off to pretend like they're educated, it's at this point common knowledge that they're two different characters, but nobody cares, so stop it.

[@tobelebo9]

+batman88891 No No no. it's right: xkcd.com/1589/

[@lewaproductions]

If you actually read the book Adam (The Monsters real name) considers himself Dr. Frankenstein's son. And the doctor considers Adam his son. So calling him Frankenstein is correct.

[@EvenFlow391]

There's something really special knowing that Steamboat Willie, an example used at the very end of this video, is now in the Public Domain as of 2024.

[@memeyartist5591]

Adam as the Little Mermaid... That image will forever haunt me in my nightmares 0_o

[@Fire_Score_Maximum]

How about the remake?

[@silverdamascus2023]

Bambi and Winnie the Pooh are now in the public domain. But you can only use the original book versions, the Disney movies are still copyrighted.

[@frontfacingjoe9235]

1:07 "I want them to make out" Literally everyone: e x c u s e m e w u t

[@MrJoelMiller]

Hope the FBI isn’t watching this

[@nickpool1060]

0:43 No wonder why there are so many adaptations of Oz, Hercules, Robin Hood, Jungle Book, Cinderella, Tarzan, Pinocchio, and Alice. As a kid, I always thought that the Disney versions of those characters were the ONLY adaptations. But when I grew up, I learned more.

[@willlyon7129]

I find some better alternatives to the Disney movies. Peter Pan 2003, Alice in Wonderland 1999, Guillermo Del Toro’s Pinocchio, Excalibur 1981, Chuck Jones’s Jingle Book stories, Beauty and the Beast 1946, and Robin Hood Prince of Thieves.

[@Lucien234-i2z]

As someone from Europe I was aware of the original versions of Hercules, Cinderella, Alice in wonderland, Little Mermaid ect.... Because I grew up with the Hans Christian Andersen and the Grimm Brothers. It really offends me that Americans have been stealing our cultures for the last hundred years and have some cheek to turn around and talk about cultural appropriation. It's a smack in the face to Europe, I know white Americans technically are if European origin and I think thats why these stories are popular to someone like Disney but still. It's the sane thing that you have done to other European food items, butchering them and then claiming they are American Donuts, Apple pie, Pizza none of these food items are from America!!

[@Sitharos]

It’s funny to me that like 95% of these episodes are “Everything was fine until big businesses got greedy.”

[@dadgbe4834]

hoping one day adam will take the red pill. and by red pill i mean the communist one not the incel

[@MetalSonicReject]

Greetings from September 2019! Have you heard about the Spider-Man debacle between Disney and Sony?

[@ntfoperative9432]

Then everything changed when the cooperations attacked

[@SlapstickGenius23]

@@ntfoperative9432 do ya mean corporations?

[@JohnLee-dp8ey]

And now finally Mickey Mouse has entered the public domain!

[@konohamaru77]

Romeo and juliet tokyo drift HOLYSHIT COUNT ME IN!

[@elliotteng4981]

He feel like that guy would have the perfect voice for a random bird

[@mitchmcdonald2122]

Blame that on Michael Eisner. Walt Disney was long dead when that happened and he was running Disney into the ground by then

[@chrisc.7414]

"I want them to make out!" That took a hilarious fanfic turn!

[@toriwhitten7680]

Walt Disney wasn't a hypocrite. He took from the public domain to influence his characters, which many creators did at the time, but he didn't know that his company would later try to create loopholes in the system because he died in 1966, almost three decades before the Disney company extended the limit for public domain. He was just the creator of a once wonderful company that's now riddled with greed and false advertising. So calling Walt Disney a hypocrite seems pretty unfair.

[@DarkLink1996.]

They were referring to the company, not Walt.

[@Renji9031]

Adam's more calling out the Walt Disney Company for greedily refusing to stick to Walt's vision.

[@Javote95]

yet he used walt's face on the witch.

[@gabemerritt3139]

Walt didn't do it but he wasn't an angel either

[@aidenbar511]

Walt Disney was a legendary creative mind who created much of the movies and franchises we know and love today, the company is evil.

[@silverdamascus2023]

January 1st, 2023 is public domain day. Sherlock Holmes is finally free, the biggest contribution is something that was already in the public domain, but now Arthur Conan Doyle's State can't grasp at straws, we also get Metropolis and The Jazz Singer. And the perfect song for this day, "The Best Things in Life Are Free", is now free.

[@CyberKirby]

Now in the Public Domain for a limited time- MEIN KAMPH

[@TheCanterlonian]

Keep that reactionary crap unpublished if you aren't adding footnotes on why it's evil.

[@dadgbe4834]

it really annoys me that you misspelled it

[@GumpsVideos]

1:07 What he said had me dying bro. 😂

[@silverdamascus2023]

Why public domain is a fair law: - In several countries, copyright only ends after the creator of the work has died, and if it is a company, it takes 70 to 95 years to end, by then the company has already closed, and if it exists, everyone who worked on the company back then has died. - Things like music, characters, stories, these are all just ideas, things in people's heads, you can't own an idea like owning something physical like a car or a house, if you make a song, and another person starts singing this song, that person didn't steal anything from you, nothing was taken from you. - Copyright is not being the owner of the work, it's just being the owner of an exclusivity to copy, share and make public exhibitions, if you write a book, you don't own the combination of words, they have to pay you to make copies or adapt to a movie, but you can't go to stores that already have the books and force them to take them off the shelves, much less go to the homes of the people who bought the book and force them to have the books returned. - Ideas cannot belong to one person forever, ideas have to be copied, expanded and improved, imagine if someone invented the cure for cancer, but kept the patent forever? The cancer problem would not be solved, a patent only gives exclusivity to the creator to become rich for about 20 years, then everyone can make the cure as well, with works of art, copyright lasts until the person dies. - Even after LEGO lost the patent on the invention of LEGO blocks and a lot of copies appeared, they are still the market leaders, public domain does not prevent people and companies from using their creations, it just takes away the exclusivity. - Copyright was created to encourage creativity, but with copyright lasting so long, it's holding back creativity, companies like Disney, Warner, Universal and Viacom own so many things that they don't need to create anything new, that's why Hollywood no longer invests in films with original ideas and only makes adaptations, sequels, remakes and reboots. - It's impossible to create something 100% original, everything has to be based on something that already exists, in a world without public domain, we would eventually get in an era where it wouldn't be possible to create anything without violating someone's copyright, a world where ideas cannot be copied would not be more creative, it would be less creative. - There are several orphan works, they say that if you want to use something that someone else made, pay the artist to use it, but there are cases where the artist has disappeared, you can't find him to pay a license, they don't know if he's alive or dead, or if he died, they can't find his family, and when companies go bankrupt, they sell all their works to pay the debts, and it is often difficult to know who the current owner is, the buyer may even have gone bankrupt too. - Copyright became a mess, several companies are using it to censor people, and copyright rarely benefits the true creator of the work instead of the company that hired the creator, copyright lasting less would be a good idea to reduce this mess. - Of course, companies like Disney and several others, keep taking stories from the public domain to adapt to movies, series and other stuff, and even put restrictions when people adapt these stories so they don't take things from their versions, but their original creations, they don't want them to go into the public domain.

[@vitanera4032]

For fictional characters most of the points don’t apply, it is really bad that a fictional character don’t enter public domain? For me no, there is basically no con of not entering it.

[@j.e.s.m.4686]

Thank you, someone who understands it. I always that thought that PD has a great potential of allowing other creators making any type of stories with their set of vision. Not all of them are gonna be bad, some might be good and they're other filmmakers and animators passionated about the IP they grow up liking and might do something great. This is something that companies don't understand about art, they only care the money rather than their employees; this is why I like indie film/animation.

[@ajerqureshi6411]

Watching this in 2024 when Steamboat Willie entered the public domain thus making an early version of Mickey Mouse public domain is so ironic!

[@nickvang7]

That's not what the word ironic means 🤫

[@NitwitsWorld]

@@nickvang7don’t tell him he wants to be surprised 😅

[@hagamablabla]

The ironic thing is Walt Disney would probably hate this kind of abuse of copyright. He was screwed over and got his copyright stolen too.

[@tannerdavis212]

Oswald the lucky rabbit, right?

[@jeffreygao3956]

@@tannerdavis212 The very one!

[@elroylee]

"no published domain has entered the public since... 2019"

[@CozymfDQ320]

I just noticed. Lmao

[@kangarookirby]

To be fair: if the original reason for the 50 year limit was to ensure a lifetime of royalties for creators, then it does make sense for an extended period of time, given the dramatically increased average life span of Americans over the past century. Of course, Walt was long gone by the time this all went down.

[@matthewwiecek8082]

Of course it's pretty rare for individuals to own copyrights to really profitable works. Almost always it's a corporation that owns the copyright.

[@Futu06]

+kangarookirby I know this comment is a little old, but I think you've misunderstood a bit. The 50 year limit (or current 70 years) are not counted from the creation of the object of copyright, but from the author's death. As long as the author llives, he/she has copyright of their works. After their death, the copyright belongs to whoever the creator beaqueathed the copyright to, usually his/her immediate surviving family, who will have the copyright for 70 years before the copyright is considered dated and the work enters public domain.

[@thomase13]

The USA is the only country to have copyright for 100 years. Most are only 50-75.

[@thepreachingshow9614]

The United State's copyright lasts for the author's life+ 70 years (with exceptions). Mexico has life+ 100 years.

[@vitanera4032]

I don’t understand why fictional characters become of public domain, could someone explain it?

[@PeiceofNick]

Watching this in 2024 looking back is a surrel experience.

[@saturdayted]

Now my 9 year-old cousin knows why I hate the fact that he dragged me into viewing, "Finding Dumbass"

[@GumpsVideos]

Abyssal Obscurities lol

[@saturdayted]

Gump's Videos Ikr

[@veronicaescobar6590]

2 charecters in a cartoon: hates each other. Fanfiction and forums: 1:07

[@dlg.studios5649]

😂

[@Famijos]

Today Mickey Mouse isn’t protected!!!

[@OfcItsMeFMRadio]

This aged like fine wine