Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government News Your Rights Online

Disney Wins, Eldred (and everyone else) Loses 1292

hondo77 writes "In a 7-2 decision, The Supreme Court gave Disney what they wanted. Story just broke, no details yet." They're talking about the Eldred case, recently argued before the Supreme Court and mentioned on Slashdot many times. The upshot is that no works produced in the United States after the 1920's will ever go out of copyright. Opinions: Majority opinion, Stevens' dissent, Breyer's dissent.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Disney Wins, Eldred (and everyone else) Loses

Comments Filter:
  • eh (Score:1, Funny)

    by Number13 ( 641387 ) on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @11:48AM (#5087905)
    It's not the place of the Judicial branch to usurp Congress's right to make idiotic laws.
  • by Col. Panic ( 90528 ) on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @11:56AM (#5088027) Homepage Journal
    Ooh - a creative and useful thought. You will be cited and punished accordingly. Report immediately to your local DMCA enforcement office for reeducation

    <no carrier>
  • by Gortbusters.org ( 637314 ) on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @11:57AM (#5088033) Homepage Journal
    Case in point: Vanilla Ice and Ice Ice Baby.

    I think I remember the Behind The Music on it, there is like a one note difference between the little jingle in there and the one that Queen[?] does.
  • by tx_mgm ( 82188 ) <notquiteoriginal ... m ['ail' in gap]> on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @12:08PM (#5088148)
    and they had me completely convinced that the recent re-release of would really, REALLY be my absolute last chance to own the video/DVD/soundtrack/action figures/magazine EVER! and to think i let that golden opportunity pass thru my fingers! now disney can do such promotions like every other year.....oh, wait.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @12:23PM (#5088261)
    A recent interpretation of Aesop's fables have both an Owl /and/ a Crow. This is obviously derived from those characters, and you, sir, are in copyright violation.
  • by ethereal ( 13958 ) on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @12:26PM (#5088290) Journal

    "...this is exactly what I've been waiting for. Now that my compensation is ensured, I will be certain to publish my next three novels that I've been working out down here. Thanks, America!"

    -- F. Scott Fitzgerald, interviewed via ouija board in The New York Times

    See? Retroactive copyright extension does work :)

  • by MikeFM ( 12491 ) on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @12:34PM (#5088348) Homepage Journal
    It's only illegal as long as we keep letting the same sort of bastards get elected. If you don't like it vote for someone else. If there is nobody worth voting for run yourself. If you still can't get enough votes to make a difference then go find some shitty third world country trying to modernize and make a deal with them and move in several thousand geeks all at once. If that can't be done then do like I am and work on making a floating city in international waters. (Yes, I'm part of a group actually working on that.) There is always something you can do about it.

    As for me I'm currently ripping every bit of media I can lay hands on. It isn't legal to distribute the material now but at least I can keep a copy in case I get a chance to pass such things on. I thought of building a robot that could write (once) and read data off massive stone on metal plates in such a form that it'll take a freaking long time to destroy the data (unlike hdd's, cd's, etc). Besides amussing myself it'd be an interesting way to time capsule data.. and what a conversation piece. "Oh yeh I replaced my backyard with 40 acres of warehoused data engraved on alumnium plates in binary." :)
  • by rsdio ( 156261 ) on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @01:02PM (#5088544) Homepage
    I like the way RMS put it:

    "A government of the people, by the flunkies, and for the corporations."
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @01:08PM (#5088572)
    The intellectual commons are always going to get enclosed because the public are peasants & the corporations the new nobility.

    However I reckon the best defence is attack. Argue & push for the Copyright limit to be increased to say 2500 years.

    Make sure governments put through laws such that if an heir can't be found (e.g. Shakespear's heirs) then the relevant state gets the cash (e.g. UK for Shakespear & Iraq for Alladin)

    This would ensure that disney etc who've built their empires on other people's "Intellectual Property" (Cinderella, Alladin, Mulan, Alice in Wonderland etc.etc.) become "IP thieves" & thus suddenly they would change their argument towards limiting terms as otherwise they've got to pay out to show their own films etc.

    Also it would bring many other interested parties into the frame such as would the Catholic Church be able to force the destruction of all "un-authorized" (i.e. not in Latin) copies of the New Testament? Suddenly you've got the Bible belt on your side in favour of copyright terms......

    So argue in favour of a vastly longer term not a shorter one. Bring Cicero & Plato back into copyright
  • by smd4985 ( 203677 ) on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @01:09PM (#5088579) Homepage
    after have read most of the opinions, it is clear that the majority of justices just aren't comfortable calling congress out on this terrible law. they essentially say "the term of copyrights is something for congress to best decide", without realizing that congress is increasingly guided by the purse-strings of big corporations.

    then again, lessis says it best in his blog - if the courts won't have the balls to overturn this law, WE have to make a ruckus and have congress repeal it. if that is ever possible, who know?
  • by FroMan ( 111520 ) on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @01:50PM (#5088757) Homepage Journal
    Alright, what kind of Goofy(c) idea is this? Its not like the supreme court is some sort of Mickey Mouse(c) court. Its like Disney has some Genie(c) that they pull out to make the courts forget to se their Brain(c). Walt, that Sleeping Beauty(c) in his cryogenic coffin, must be very proud that the Bell(c) never tolled for him and that his Small World(c) will continue to thrive. I guess that is what the Dumbos(c) in congress want for us.
  • Re:Thanks (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @03:11PM (#5089268)
    Way to lose, fuckchops.
  • Re:EVER?! (Score:2, Funny)

    by MSZ ( 26307 ) on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @03:25PM (#5089385)
    I just don't see how "securing for limited times to authors" can reasonably be translated to any time period measured from the death of the author.

    Maybe they are religious and want the author's immortal soul to enjoy royalties?
  • by Renraku ( 518261 ) on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @04:29PM (#5089808) Homepage
    From the legal representatives of 'Aesop' to 'Slashdot' and 'oliverthered' You are hereby ordered to remove the post and to cease and desist any further activities regarding owls and crows. We feel that we are representing the true intentions of the late Aesop. If you do not comply, you will be charged US$20,000,000, plus any fees incurred by your litigation. While our late client has no copyright on his work, we feel that if he were still alive, he would have extended his copyright well past this day. Thank you for your compliance. Sincerely,
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @05:06PM (#5090040)
    Copyright violation is pretty easy. One simple way to do it is to perform in public a copyrighted song. Since Happy Birthday to you [snopes.com] is copyrighted, singing it in public is illegal (more so if you get money for it (so put out a hat and have a accomplice throw in some money)). Anyone out there interested in protesting by singing in public and trying to get arrested? It would probably be quite good publicity and would demonstrate to more people the absurity of copyright law.
  • Yawn! (Score:3, Funny)

    by buss_error ( 142273 ) on Wednesday January 15, 2003 @09:22PM (#5091561) Homepage Journal
    I think that (yawn) this is the most (Yawn) unfair ruling in the (YAWN) history of (YAWWWWNNN) of the country. (YAAAAAAAWWWWWWNNNNNNN). Excuse me. I think I'll take a nap for the next few years....

    Liberty, January 21st, 2001.

    (YAAAAAWWWWWWWWNNNNNN!!!!! *Smack* *samck*) Ngh ngh ngh.....zzzzzzzz.

    Liberty's comment on the USA "Patriot" act.

    ZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!!! ZZZzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzz!

    Liberty's comment on Eldred v. Ashcroft SCotUS decision

    In other news, "The Three men I admire most" took the last train for the coast. AmTrak funding was discontinued shortly thereafter. Turning to our final item, Lady Liberty, long asleep in our nation, passed away quietly in the early morning hours. She was preceeded in death by her sister "Fair Trial", brothers "rights of the people", and "Free Press". An uncle, "Bill", of Rights, Iowa, passed away late last year. Her step children, Church and State, were reconciled after a long seperation.

    That's the news. Further announcements will be sent to you via e-mail from the government, as a press corps is deemed to waste vital national resources needed in our distressed markets and had been discontinued by order of the Whore^h^h^h^h^h White House. Good bye.

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Working...