95 years

 

As I'm certain everyone out there in the world is aware, the very first iteration of one of the world's very first mascots has finally come around and entered the Public Domain. Yes, the very original Mickey Mouse, as conjured up in Steamboat Willie, has hit the ripe old age of 95- which qualifies the old rat to become the latest lump of putty slapped in front of the faces of every warped and twisted mind of any and everyone who scours the interwebs. This is after languishing for decades within the wrought-steel doors of the Disney Vault hidden away from the rest of the world in the threatening way that Disney likes to keep hold of it's properties- akin to a Dragon languishing over it's hoard- flickering a forked tongue curling around wisps of his fiery breath. Whatever does this mean for the future of copyright? Not much, I'd wager.

Disney has been pushing back this day as long as they can for a good while now. Arguing their case in court to push past the requisite years to remain with the copyright realms, and as Disney used to have deep respect and deeper pockets- laws changed with their whims. Today I'm not sure if Disney are just more lax about the possibility of apocalyptic clones coming and stealing their immutable throne, or if they've lost the respect (but certainly not the money) required to drive legislation like they once did. Whatever the case, Disney does not need to worry about it's brand just yet. The Mickey Mouse recognisable across the world, sans the hat and plus the white gloves, still exists within their copyrightable brand. I do believe that the iconic high-pitched and excitable voice of the Mouse is also within their redesigned image too. But that won't always remain the case forever.

I'd imagine there are quite a few legacy studios with animated mascots that saw the buffer of Disney's Mickey as a safety net- now drawn to worry about the sanctity of their creation. One such company would have to be Warner Bros. who's own key mascot, the sarcastic and lovable Buggs Bunny, is due for his own review in about 10 years time. At least Mickey Mouse has undergone enough changes for there to be veritable different versions of him that Disney can argue about in court- Buggs Bunny is a monolith, an icon, that guy hasn't changed for nobody practically since the day of his inception- and I suspect that rigidness might come to haunt his owners in the years to come. Why are they so haunted? Well, because with the public domain comes... shudder... public arts! (The most lamentable of the many art forms known to man!)

You'll likely remember that famed cartoon bear Winnie the Pooh recently made his way to the public domain a few years back, and was immediately exploited for a low-rent horror movie that delivered the absolute minimum viable product for a return of over 10 times the development cost. 'Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey' is a pathetic splotch of a movie, but the sheer gimmicky nature of it is now indistinguishable from the wider Pooh brand. Whenever I search up 'Winnie the Pooh movie', that is what I see plastered before all of the many other movies literally named Winnie the Pooh! (That might be because my personal Google account is as twisted as I am, and thus that's what they think I'm looking for- but the point stands!) Disney and it's co-conspirators are terrified of that same fate befalling their properties.

Mickey Mouse has already found itself laboured with a horror movie soon to hit our shelves and a horror video game which had to change it's unfortunate name after discovering the hidden meaning of one of it's chosen titles. What if these imitations of their work start to take over the brand of Mickey, and laymen start confusing the trite with Disney proper? Sure, Disney have already laid out stipulations to curtail exactly that- but the general public are stupid- the mix-ups are going to happen. So what is there to be done? Well, mayhaps companies as grand and large as Disney will have to stop relying on the intellectual property of dead men in order to represent their various brands? Mayhaps we can have a world of creation spurred on by the new instead of constrained to the corpses of the old? Maybe- Disney and it's friends can learn to adapt with the times. Just a suggestion.

In the coming years we're going to see a deluge of characters, the likes of which are still recognisable and popular today, come into the domain of the grubby publics. Tigger actually joins Mickey in becoming Public Domain this year, which means the makers of Blood and Honey have everything they need for their inevitable muck-raking sequel, Pluto is headed our way next year, Donald Duck squeezes in just before the end of the decade at 2029 and in the 2030's? Pandemonium. Total anarchy. Batman, Superman, Captain America, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, the DC Captain Marvel, Jay Garrick Flash- DC is pretty much screwed come 2036. (I hope they've milked as much out of the public as possible by then because the slop is coming to clean up anything left over!)

If you think these studios defend their properties with the zealotry of a pack lion today, just wait until we enter the nitty gritty of Public Domain disputes. "Oh, you can't have Superman fly in your project, because in his first iteration he is only noted as being able to 'Leap tall buildings in a single bound'!" "Actually, DC's Captain Marvel didn't wear that uniform until 1955!" It's all going to come out then, let me tell you! The pettiness, the extra little stipulations and hidden rules! Being told your cash cow is now open to the public is tantamount to announcing your intention to whore out their first born daughter, and these companies will burn the entire legal system to the ground before they let that go without a say!

So bear witness to all the machinations of the coming year as Disney finally steps back from being the Copyright bogeyman they've loved posing as for the past century. (And yes, knowing Walt Disney's liberal use of other people's property, I consider the company a 'Copyright ghoul' from inception.) What I would be very interested to see, however, is how long before something genuinely worthwhile is afforded to us from all these repealed regulations, instead of all these opportunistic drivel that launches out the gate first. There's got to be someone out there who's great masterpiece work is held back only because of some niggling copyright axe hanging over their head- I just know it! Wait- wasn't the best of Lovecraft's works published circa 1928, particularly 'Call of Cthulhu'? (I have a book to publish, stat!)