Cay Denise

Copyright protection for the earliest version of Mickey and Minnie Mouse expires this year.  That means, Mickey and Minnie Mouse characters as used in Steamboat Willie and Plane Crazy (the 1928 version of each) become part of the Public Domain in 2024.  The two early images can then be used for other creative works without fear of copyright law issues.   But WAIT A MINUTE, before taking up brush and paint or pen to make a derivative work, consider that Disney has been in business a very long time and was helpful in extending copyright terms that were approved by Congress.   Copyright law is complicated, and where copyright and trademark apply to the same creative work, that intersection adds unique peculiarities.  Disney still maintains copyright (for 95 years) of each later version of Mickey and Minnie Mouse.  So, it's important to know which version is in the Public Domain.  That said, if the character is trademarked, this sets up other issues when u...

In a recent Washington Post article, it's author challenges a recent U.S. Copyright Office decision.  The question asked was who owns the copyright to images generated using artificial intelligence.  In the case of a graphic novel by Kristina Kashtanova, the answer was:  No one does.   Here is a link to that article.  Please note you may need a subscription to access it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/04/27/artificial-intelligence-copyright-decision-misguided/  

A recent article in the New York Times has a well-done quiz about four works of art and whether you can spot which parties were successful in their copyright infringement litigation.   From my read, it comes down to the transformative and true parodying nature of the works at issue when deciding cases under the 'fair use' doctrine.  For example, an author can't just revise a book, its illustrations, scene settings, or slightly alter the plot of an already published book protected by copyright law--and legally make money by selling the revision.   This article is helpful in learning more about the 'lay of the land' in terms of how copyright infringement law is viewed by the courts especially with how they define the concepts of parody in art works and the transformative nature of them through their rulings.     The article is a short read and can be accessed at this link (though you may need a subscription to view it): Link to New York Times Article

This week, the Supreme Court will hear a case that could change the provision of  'fair use' in copyright law.  It has to do with a photograph by one artist used by a magazine, and later that magazine, with a license agreement with that photographer, asked another artist to create something based on it.  Unfortunately, the magazine didn't advise the latter artist that there was a license agreement in place.  In fact, that latter artist went on to make millions ($$s) on the works that he created as a result. By the way, the subject of the photograph was Prince.  The artists involved were Lynn Goldsmith, the original photographer, and Andy Warhol, the latter artist. This is a case to definitely one to watch because of the implications for all types of creatives and how copyright law's fair-use doctrine could change based on the decision.  NPR Article about the Court Case

The street artist having done the artwork of now President Obama, for his campaign, has filed a lawsuit asking the judge to declare the artist protected under the fair-use exceptions to copyright law which provide for limited use of copyrighted materials for purposes like criticism or comment. This is a pre-emptive suit that you can read more about at the link provided (click on this blog post's header).

Do you know what this bill will do? It addresses copyright law where orphaned works are concerned. It could make it easier for people/businesses who want to use a piece of art they can't easily find the copyright holder of...with limited consequences. It would also change the level of recovery that could be obtained by artists who are successful in litigating infringement violations. For information on this U.S. Senate Bill, please enter the bill number at www.thomas.gov . I've just written my state's senators about the bill and encourage you to research this legislation, think about its implications, and consider writing your senators about it as well.