• seaturtle ( seaturtle@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    208
    ·
    3 years ago

    Heh, more of this shit.

    Remember, the only reason we can still watch the highly influential 1922 vampire movie Nosferatu today is because some people didn’t destroy all their copies despite a court saying they had to.

    DISOBEY DESTRUCTION ORDERS.

    COPY ALL THE THINGS.

    • frezik ( frezik@midwest.social ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      3 years ago

      The author in question here was pretty shitty. He wrote his own sequel to called “Fellowship of the King”, and then sued Amazon and the Tolkien estate saying they stole elements from his book. He lost, and the Tolkien estate countersued.

      The guy played stupid games and won stupid prizes.

    • NaoPb ( NaoPb@eviltoast.org ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 years ago

      Some older dutch movies were released as rentals to the theaters that had to be returned after they stopped playing the movie. These copies were all destroyed and re-releases on DVD now look worse than what it looked like in movie theatres.

      The good news is that some theatres hung on to some movies.

        • NaoPb ( NaoPb@eviltoast.org ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 years ago

          I don’t know how many might be still be around, but I know for a couple of movies where they are. I don’t think they have been properly archived and/or converted to digital media yet. I would like to see if there are people in The Netherlands that can do these things and if the current owners of the rolls of film are willing to.

    • hh93 ( hh93@lemm.ee ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      3 years ago

      Can’t have the already well-off children go without their steady income that they didn’t have to work for…

        • sqgl ( sqgl@beehaw.org ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 years ago

          Believe it or not, some people do work extra hard in order to ensure their descendants have an easy life. I’m not weighing in on whether that is wise or not but it is definitely a thing.

      • frezik ( frezik@midwest.social ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 years ago

        The books go into public domain in 20 years. Now that Christopher Tolkien is out of the way (who tended to block a lot of stuff, for better or worse) , the current heirs want as much out of it as they can.

        20 years might sound like a lot, but that’s about as much time as between the Peter Jackson movies and now.

            • pbjamm ( pbjamm@beehaw.org ) 
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              3 years ago

              I remember thinking that in 1998 too. It is too late to extend copyright for Steamboat Willie before it expires but that does not mean that corps like Disney won be fighting tooth and nail to extend it again in a few years when things they actually care about are expiring.

              • Telorand ( Telorand@reddthat.com ) 
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                3 years ago

                Yeah, Mickey is definitely going to be something they’ll fight for in the future.

                I don’t find it probable they’ll succeed in convincing Congress that copyright life should be significantly greater than a century, since that’s nice and round and excessive, but we live in a corporation-first capitalist hellscape, so who knows?

              • Telorand ( Telorand@reddthat.com ) 
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                3 years ago

                They have, but they didn’t. And it’s not a foregone conclusion that they’d succeed. The longest copyright lifespan is currently 105 years from what I read, and I wonder if they could grease enough palms to convince people it should be longer than a century.

                We’re already in “excessively long” territory, and Congress still has a few reasonable people left, so I’m not convinced it would happen.

      • Telorand ( Telorand@reddthat.com ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        You can’t just extend copyright indefinitely. It’s not like a patent, where you can make minute changes and claim it’s a new product. The original works have a copyright limit of 95 years after the first date of publish (thanks Disney and other corporate lobbyists).

        If we go by The Return of the King, it was published in 1955. That means the words, the story, the settings, and the characters will be public domain in 2050. Steamboat Willie, on the other hand, was published in 1928. That means it expires at the end of this year. Unless Disney can convince Congress to change copyright law again, these copyrights all have hard expiration dates.

        ETA: Disney might have a case where they can claim copyright on the information they added or changed from the original works, just like how they can still claim copyright over Mickey after losing Steamboat Willie.

        And I’m sure they will, because fuck society, amirite? /s

  • Should copyright for works that old be expired? Yes!

    In the actual world we live in, was this guy ever going to avoid being sued so hard that his grandchildren will be embarrassed for him? No!

    You’ve got to admire the lemming-like devotion to the legal cliff he threw himself off though. Writing a sequel to not only a copyright work, but one that is still in the cultural zeitgeist thanks to a 20-year old wildly successful series of films? Ballsy. Subsequently suing one of the largest companies in the world and the estate that produced the original works as infringing his copyright?

    Chutzpa, I believe the term is.

    • SomeoneElse ( SomeoneElse@lemmy.ca ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      3 years ago

      Yeah, this guy didn’t have a leg to stand on. There’s an independently owned cafe opposite sarhole mill (inspiration for “the shire”) on the street JRR Tolkien grew up on called “the hungry hobbit”. It’s been called that since 2005 - before the release of the hobbit film. A production company sued this tiny sandwich shop, sitting on a roundabout 3 miles south of Birmingham for the unauthorised use of the word “hobbit”. That was completely egregious imo. It’s now called “the hungry hobb” - they just took down the last two letters on the sign. I really should grab a sandwich from them one day.

    • evranch ( evranch@lemmy.ca ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      3 years ago

      Ballsy? He’s an outright copyright troll and anyone celebrating him here in the comments should read the article…

      He wrote a knockoff book and then tried to claim Tolkien’s characters as his own and sue his estate? Does nobody remember the days of BS software patent trolls trying to claim they invented “the app” or “method for clicking on things with the mouse cursor?” Do we remember how mad we were at those shysters?

      This guy deserves whatever he gets.

    • sqgl ( sqgl@beehaw.org ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 years ago

      Speaking of Chutzpah…

      “The Fellowship of the King” title is a combination of the titles of the first book in the LOTR trilogy “The Fellowship of the Ring” and the third book “The Return of the King”.

      “The Two Trees” title is similar to the second book in the LOTR trilogy “The Two Towers”

  • Darkassassin07 ( Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    3 years ago

    Look, I agree his works shouldn’t be destroyed, just not monetizable.

    But the dude poked a bear with a sharp stick… Suing the creators of the story/characters you’ve built your content on for copyright infringement? Brilliant move…

    • Kwakigra ( Kwakigra@beehaw.org ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 years ago

      This is more like smacking a warhead with a hammer until it blows like in Loony Tunes. It is a shockingly suicidal decision with predictable results. He’ll be in debt for the rest of his life and should be thankful the Tolkien estate didn’t have him flayed for his impudence. Learning about how out of touch with reality the author is does make me curious how unhinged his book might be, though. If it turns out to be “The Room” of lotr fanficfiction I’d like to see it fan canonized just to spite the most litigious family in literature.

  • Th4tGuyII ( Th4tGuyII@kbin.social ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    3 years ago

    Going after the copyright holder for infringing on your work, which by merely existing commercially infringes on their copyright, is one hell of a way to get sued out the arse…

    Having said that, it is a crime that LOTR still hasn’t entered the public domain yet.

      • BearOfaTime ( BearOfaTime@lemm.ee ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 years ago

        I don’t even like Tolkien (find his writing to be just excessive, I don’t need to know the color of the buttons on the shirt of the dead character with no name), and even I have to agree, lol.

        Too many re-interpretations of authors’ works. Tolkien is highly detailed - not reflecting that (or worse, substituting your own details) in a movie or show is just hubris. If you’re so damn good why don’t you write your own shit. Oh, your name doesn’t sell instantly is why.

        • Norgur ( Norgur@kbin.social ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          3 years ago

          We’ve seen this with the Witcher, we’ve seen it with GoT, we’ve seen it with LOTR: super artistic production teams which have their heads so deep up their own arses and are entrenched so deeply inside that weird removed-from-reality Hollywood bubble that they legitimately think they know better how to interpret the lore some world renowned author made than the author himself. Always ends in mediocre showsand hilarious interviews with said production teams where

          a) everybody is wrong but them
          b) bUt OuR vIsIoN

          • Dr. Bob ( DrBob@lemmy.ca ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            3 years ago

            Oh God The Witcher. The production team was handed an incredibly strong female lead character who was smarter, more politically astute, and more feared/respected than almost any other character in the series. And they immediately tore her down and made her a petty whining brat while claiming it was about female empowerment. A pox on Netflix and the entire production team.

      • pbjamm ( pbjamm@beehaw.org ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 years ago

        The story lines they fabricated were (mostly) formulaic, the effects were (mostly) poor, and the characters were (mostly) unlikable. Apart from that I liked it! :P

        It had a few moments that I enjoyed but overall it fell flat because the characters where flat.