Timeline for When does the copyright on Isaac Asimov's works expire?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 19 at 13:57 | comment | added | Alexia | Steamboat Willy is, at the time of my writing this comment, in the public domain, as of January 1st 2024. | |
| Jul 26, 2023 at 14:20 | comment | added | Yakk | @gidds They managed to save the red pants as yet. | |
| Jul 26, 2023 at 14:17 | comment | added | gidds | Surprisingly, it looks like US copyright terms will not be extended again, and ‘Steamboat Willie’ will revert to the public domain on 2024-01-01, as Republican lawmakers have vowed to oppose any further extensions (apparently for political reasons relating to Disney opposing the ‘Don't Say Gay’ law). (However, Disney will continue to hold trademark protection on the character.) | |
| Jan 1, 2019 at 18:54 | comment | added | Yakk | @kevin I understand your position, and am uninterested in it. Thanks for your input. | |
| Jan 1, 2019 at 18:49 | comment | added | Kevin | @Yakk: I don't care about paragraph 4. I care about the "every 20 years" line, which wasn't even true in 2018 (one in 1976, one in 1998). | |
| Jan 1, 2019 at 18:45 | comment | added | Yakk | @kevin Did you read down to paragraph 4? I'm pretty explicitly clear I'm predicting an extension by 2023, not an extension by Jan 1 2019 (just over 2 months after I posted this answer). | |
| Jan 1, 2019 at 15:05 | comment | added | Kevin | As of today, this answer is wrong. All works published in 1923 just entered the public domain as their copyrights expired in the US, so Disney has already missed the deadline for "a 20-year extension every 20 years." | |
| Oct 26, 2018 at 18:21 | comment | added | joojaa | @alephzero It's not a coincidence, they know what benefits you can get from this and dont want others to repeat that. | |
| Oct 26, 2018 at 17:46 | comment | added | David Richerby | "Every 20 years since the 1980s" is a very scary-sounding way of saying "once in the 1980s and once in the 2000s." I've been born once every fifty years since the 1970s! | |
| Oct 26, 2018 at 8:46 | comment | added | alephzero | The irony of the USA's "Disney rule" for copyright is that the entire publishing industry of the USA was built by completely ignoring international copyright law in the 18th and 19th centuries, until they were eventually forced to accept that such a thing as "international copyright" even existed. | |
| Oct 26, 2018 at 7:43 | comment | added | Harper - Reinstate Monica | This is the only correct answer. | |
| Oct 25, 2018 at 19:46 | comment | added | Z. Cochrane | This is a rant about copyright law but I quite enjoyed it. (remind me to check back in 5 years...) | |
| Oct 25, 2018 at 16:49 | comment | added | Graham | @TylerH We should assume that previous patterns will continue unless there are valid reasons to believe they won't. So it's exactly the same question. The brewery will continue to supply the pub with beer in exchange for remuneration, and representatives will continue to supply law changes in exchange for remuneration. We have evidence of this already. | |
| Oct 25, 2018 at 16:35 | comment | added | Bill K | How is assuming the law won't change any less (or more) of an assumption than assuming it will? At least one side has presented an argument that the existing pattern might continue... where is your argument that it won't? | |
| Oct 25, 2018 at 14:06 | comment | added | Yakk | @TylerH So, the word assumption carries with it the connotation "without proof/evidence". Providing proof/evidence isn't "just a long-winded way" to state an assumption; the accumulation of evidence is the difference between an assumption and not-an-assumption. For example, Am I assuming people in this comment thread are speaking English? I have lots of evidence they are (they keep on forming reasonably well formed English sentences, which is unlikely if they are just monkeys banging away at keys). Saying my belief that people are talking English is an assumption is pretty inaccurate. | |
| Oct 25, 2018 at 13:59 | comment | added | TripeHound | @TylerH No different than me noticing the sun has risen every morning for at least 19,000 days in a row and assuming that it will do so tomorrow. It's not guaranteed that the law will change, but there's a strong likelihood based on past experience. | |
| Oct 25, 2018 at 13:55 | comment | added | TylerH | @Yakk That's just a long-winded way of saying "we should assume the law will change". | |
| Oct 25, 2018 at 13:50 | comment | added | Yakk | @TylerH I don't assume the law will be changed: I provide a rational argument why it is extremely likely the duration of copyright will be changed long before any of Dr Asimov's work fall out of copyright. | |
| Oct 25, 2018 at 13:42 | comment | added | TylerH | @Graham Different kind of question; Yakk's answer relies on the assumption that a law will be changed to accommodate it. | |
| Oct 24, 2018 at 23:08 | comment | added | Graham | @Valorum If I asked "When will this pub run out of beer?", the answer needs to not just consider the rate of consumption of my friends, but also the fact that the owner can ring the brewery to get more barrels delivered... | |
| Oct 24, 2018 at 21:29 | comment | added | Yakk | @Valorum It is an attempt, as accurately as possible, let the OP know when Asimov's works will fall out of copyright? Quoting expiration dates when those dates reliably extend 20 years every 20 years doesn't give an accurate result. The "rant" portion is just giving evidence why you should expect it to happen again. "When will I grow taller than my older brother" should take into account the fact that your older brother is growing as well. | |
| Oct 24, 2018 at 21:23 | comment | added | Valorum | This seems to be more like a rant about copyright law than a serious attempt to answer the question based on the available publishing dates of Asimov's works | |
| Oct 24, 2018 at 21:17 | history | answered | Yakk | CC BY-SA 4.0 |