Earliest Versions of Disney’s Mickey Mouse and Minnie to Enter Public Domain in 2024

[triplexxx]

Originally Posted by neatoman

In case anyone was wondering, I did watch Blood and Honey. It was a terrible movie, in nearly every conceivable way, but I suspected it was going to be going in and even if I didn't, I still think I would have been indifferent to the actual quality. I get the feeling this will be the same, it's probably going to suck but I know this isn't the end-all-be-all for public domain characters, so at worst, it will only annoy me on the same level as an original project with no expectations.

Yeah, so why bother, then? Why contribute to box office gains for this sick trash they've been dealing out lately, just to satisfy morbid curiosity? Plan on checking out that upcoming Blood & Honey sequel as well? Frankly, I'd rather sit through 36 straight hours of NC-17 porno than look at one more picture of this crap posted on the web anywhere. It's like the people making this crap are looking to have a mob hit put on them, and ain't no public domain or copyright laws going to protect them from that, that's for sure.

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by triplexxx

Yeah, so why bother, then? Why contribute to box office gains for this sick trash they've been dealing out lately, just to satisfy morbid curiosity? Plan on checking out that upcoming Blood & Honey sequel as well? Frankly, I'd rather sit through 36 straight hours of NC-17 porno than look at one more picture of this crap posted on the web anywhere. It's like the people making this crap are looking to have a mob hit put on them, and ain't no public domain or copyright laws going to protect them from that, that's for sure.

While I'm pretty sure you're just shitposting, I might as well answer this earnestly.

Morbid curiosity, yes, but I am also open to be pleasantly surprised when my instincts tell me this will suck and it turns out not to. I go to plenty of movies I suspect are going to be bad and sometimes I do get surprised. Makes me wonder, is it better or worse than going into a movie expecting it to be good and get disappointing? You tell me.

[triplexxx]

Originally Posted by neatoman

While I'm pretty sure you're just shitposting, I might as well answer this earnestly.

Morbid curiosity, yes, but I am also open to be pleasantly surprised when my instincts tell me this will suck and it turns out not to. I go to plenty of movies I suspect are going to be bad and sometimes I do get surprised. Makes me wonder, is it better or worse than going into a movie expecting it to be good and get disappointing? You tell me.

Disappointing I could handle. Nauseating? Not likely.

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by triplexxx

Disappointing I could handle. Nauseating? Not likely.

I have a pretty high threshold for that. Anyway, here's what the creator of Earthworm Jim added to this, first time I see someone of (kinda sorta) higher profile doing something with Mickey Mouse's recent public domain status. Spoilered because it might seem offensive to someone.

Spoiler:

[The Deadman]

Originally Posted by triplexxx

Yeah, so why bother, then? Why contribute to box office gains for this sick trash they've been dealing out lately, just to satisfy morbid curiosity? Plan on checking out that upcoming Blood & Honey sequel as well? Frankly, I'd rather sit through 36 straight hours of NC-17 porno than look at one more picture of this crap posted on the web anywhere. It's like the people making this crap are looking to have a mob hit put on them, and ain't no public domain or copyright laws going to protect them from that, that's for sure.

These kinds of movies are made so we can laugh at them. It's not going worldwide in theaters and it's made for a quick buck. I probably will see Blood and Honey 2 because I somewhat enjoyed the first one, as bad as it was.

[Allio]

Guess I’ll need to throw my own hand into the steamboat Willie horror story. I think I can come up with a good idea.

[Original TMNT Cartoon Fan]

Imagine if the old American copyright laws were still around. We chould've had works from 1967.

https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/public...2021/pre-1976/

[neatoman]

[ZariusTwo]

[Mayhem]

Most of these are still in breach of what has occurred. Only the cartoon and the cartoon imagery is now in the public domain. So that's the image of Mickey without gloves and Minnie as it turns out, and Pete. You can't call anything you show using those image representations as Mickey or Minnie etc, you can't use the name of the cartoons either, they are all trademarked. And Disney will ALWAYS have the trademarks. I think a bunch of people are going to find the shock of Disney lawyers slapping them in the next few months as a result because they've misunderstood what is now available for use.

It's the same reason Winnie the Pooh in a red shirt is still Disney owned, but naked Winnie is perfectly usuable.

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

Anyone up for Adult Swim dedicating an entire show to Mickey?