They aren't going to push until the very last moment. You can be sure they are greasing the skids though. That mouse will NOT become public property.
Copyright should be abolished.
As it stands, copyright serves little positive social purpose. The overwhelming majority of creators get paid little if anything for their work, and still there is a glut of content. So there should be no fear of the world losing lots of great content if there was no copyright.
Most of the benefit of copyright is reaped by the middle men, who profit off the work when the creatives that made it have long ceased to do so (if they ever did). Abolishing copyright will thus mostly affect these middle men, and have little effect on content creation itself.
Those creatives that still want to get paid in a copyright-free era can find business models that don't rely on copyright, like performances, donations, or kickstarter-like models where one is paid for future work.
I think it should be extended again. How else can dead authors and musicians be incentivized into creating new works?
Even if it won't be extended, the damage has already been done. Imho this whole complex around "copyright" and "intellectual property" is probably the biggest "capital bubble" in human history.
Tangible goods are finite on this planet, intangible goods (like IP) are not, so they are the perfect tool for keeping this "perpetual growth machine" aka world economy going, even if actual resources become scarce, we will never run out of ideas to "monetize".
In that regard, I don't think it's a coincidence that most of the developed economies have moved from manufacturing industries, dealing with actual goods and finite resources, to "service industries", where most of the value is generated through "ideas" which are infinite.
It's easy to put a value on something tangible, you can calculate the resources that go in there, the man-hours needed to manufacture it, the costs of the manufacturing facilities. The same does not apply to most intellectual property, its whole value is pretty much an arbitrary estimation with no limiting factors in terms of real-world resources, as such there are no rational limits to how much one could charge for them.
Make 4 year extensions for copyright to cost $1,000,000 per item. Increase the fee to account for inflation.
Micky Mouse and Sherlock Holmes (2nd Half) will stay locked up but the 99.9% of the other works are freed.
It isn't perfect but it will release the rest into public domain.
Relevant EFF explanation of what will happen:
In 2018, the copyright on those early Mickey cartoons will end (if Congress doesn't repeat the sins of '76 and '98, that is—and you can bet we'll be pulling out all the stops to prevent that). What happens then?
Almost nothing, if Disney and friends get their way.
title card for Steamboat Willie Those Mickey cartoons are almost certainly in the public domain anyway. In the late 1920s, copyright wasn't automatic: rightsholders had to undertake certain "formalities"—registering with the Copyright Office and displaying correctly formatted notices—and then renew those formalities periodically. Scholars who've looked into the matter make a very good case that the early Disney organization flubbed its registration, notice and renewal, and there are probably cartoons that are in the public domain today.
Which is not to say that Disney wouldn't sue you if you tried to remix them, upload them to the Internet Archive, or sell them in on a compilation DVD of other public domain cartoons from the period. They almost certainly would, and it would cost you an unthinkable sum of money to defend yourself. Emerging victorious but impoverished, you would have won a small victory.
But at that point, we expect that Disney will try to use another body of law to suppress creativity and commerce involving Mickey Mouse, whether or not "Steamboat Willie" and "Plane Crazy" are in the public domain: trademark law. If you sell something Mickeyish—including its public domain cartoons—Disney might ask a court to stop you because people who buy the cartoons from you may think they're buying from Disney. Back to court with you!
They discuss is briefly but my understanding is the copyright only protects the work itself. IE the movie steamboat willie could now be freely published by anyone with access to it? But Disney will still own the trademark and be the only entity that can produce new original Mickey Mouse content?
The basic argument is that "big content" don't seem to be pushing it, scared off by the protests against SOPA.
Honestly, I think the clickbait "why" does the article a disservice: it is a more in depth work than the 150 word bullet point with gifs that the "why" advertises.
In that case I guess they’ll just up the DRM on everything to make actual copyright law irrelevant.
Most people wouldn't complain if a new category of copyright were created just for Disney, and anyone else who wants an extra 75 years. Let it be opt in. Most people understand why Disney values its mouse etc., and that it stands to lose income if copyright expires. We get it that they're a special case. We the people can live without that stuff in the public domain. Why doesn't Congress just ask us? (Or would that be unequal protection under the law?)
I disagree. Disney has money, and all politicians spend at least half of their working hours soliciting money in exchange for the promise of writing laws. It will be extended.
The founders idea of patent and copyright as being meant to last as long as a working lifetime (20 years) died a long time ago. This is just one more evidence of the democracy moving to plutocracy.
Let's watch it get renewed. Then, up-vote my comment.
What does this mean in reality... You could make derivative works of the original Mickey Mouse free from copyright infringement? Would copyright still be in place for subsequent Mickey Mouse productions?
I think the copyright is slowly becoming irrelevant, I have a feeling that the real push is to treat copyrights the same way as patents (intelectual property), so for instance, you cannot make a cartoon with Mickey Mouse even if you make character a bit different or call it differently, or you cannot take a Disney story with slightly different characters. Basically, it won't be any more about protecting own creative work but about creating an artificial scarcity.
Can't they just use trademark based enforcement if copyright extension stops?
there should be extensions to protect from gross misuse but only that, so mickey mouse in an advert could be ok but in a porno wouldn't
I'm surprised that people cares about this. A cartoon not becoming public property.