Re: benefits of the public domain and limited copyright terms?

On Sat, May 06, 2000, Lance Purple <lpurple[_at_]netcom.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 5 May 2000, Jon Noring <noring[_at_]netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> > On another mailing list a very pointed question was asked, the gist
> > of the question being "why is the Public Domain necessary -- what's
> > wrong with perpetual copyright terms?"
>
> Because it would likely have stopped Shakespeare, Walt Disney,
> Andrew Lloyd Weber, and countless other artists from creating
> their most popular works:
>
> Shakespeare's _Hamlet_ [1601] would've infringed Saxo Grammaticus'
> _History of Prince Amleth_ [1185] ; his _Romeo and Juliet_ [1591]
> was taken from Arthur Brooke's poem _Romeus and Juliet_ [1562] ;
> most of his historical plays would have infringed R. Holingshead's
> _Chronicles of England_ [1573] ; etc.
>
> Andre Lloyd Webber's _Phantom of the Opera_ [1986] would have
> infringed Gaston Leroux's novel [1910] of the same name.
>
> Most of Walt Disney's animated films were based on public-domain
> works published in the 1800's. _Show White_, _Cinderella_,
> _Pinnochio_, _Jungle Book_ (released exactly one year after
> Kipling's copyrights expired), _Alice in Wonderland_, etc. etc.

No, it would probably have required them to pay dues to the people who did the creative work on the back of which they took something of a free ride (though in each case there is clearly some original input on the part of the second teller of the story: less with Disney, more with Shakespeare).

Peter Groves
<peter.groves[_at_]virgin.net> Received on Wed May 10 2000 - 12:13:55 GMT