What will enter the public domain in 2024?

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Steamboat Willie’s entry into the US public domain in 2024 is prompting renewed scrutiny of how copyright, trademark, and corporate lobbying have shaped access to culture. Commenters explore what can legally be done with early Mickey Mouse, Winnie-the-Pooh and other works once their copyrights expire, and how trademark protections, platform policies, and litigation risk may still chill reuse. The conversation widens to books, music, software, international term differences, and even new publishers dedicating works directly to the public domain, raising broader questions about how creators can earn a living and whether current copyright terms are socially beneficial.

Steamboat Willie, Mickey Mouse, and Disney’s Strategy

  • Many focus on the 1928 “Steamboat Willie” Mickey entering the public domain.
  • Distinction emphasized: copyright on that specific film/design expires; Disney’s trademarks on “Mickey Mouse” and related imagery remain.
  • Some expect Disney to aggressively sue under trademark, making practical use risky; others note examples like the horror Winnie-the-Pooh film that drew no lawsuit.
  • There is debate on how hard it would be to clearly disassociate from Disney and survive litigation. Some suggest only well-capitalized or very determined creators will test it.
  • Disney’s use of Steamboat Willie in logos and recent retro-styled shorts is seen as shoring up trademark and brand, not extending copyright.

Public Domain, Copyright, and Derivative Editions

  • Consensus: once a work is in the public domain, anyone can copy, sell, or redistribute it; “pirating” a pure public domain text isn’t infringement.
  • New elements (translations, introductions, annotations, illustrations, layouts, ebook code) can be separately copyrighted.
  • Fixing typos alone likely isn’t copyrightable; how much formatting counts as “transformative” is discussed but left as unclear/edge-case.

International Term Differences and Oddities

  • Life+50 vs. life+70 regimes matter: works like Tolkien’s will enter the public domain earlier in some countries (e.g., New Zealand) than in the UK/US.
  • Regional Project Gutenberg variants already exploit such differences; geoblocking and jurisdictional issues are debated.
  • Examples raised: King James Bible still controlled in the UK via royal prerogative; previously unpublished ancient works can gain new 25-year protection when first released.

Software and the Distant Public Domain Horizon

  • Yes, software will enter the public domain, but typical terms (~95 years in the US) mean almost nothing modern will do so in current lifetimes.
  • Some older software may have fallen out of copyright due to past registration/renewal rules.
  • “Abandonware” is described as a cultural, not legal, concept; companies rarely see enough damages to justify enforcement, but that’s not the same as public domain.

Films, Books, Music Entering the Public Domain

  • Silent and early sound films entering the public domain generate excitement; restorations and HD transfers remain owned by whoever funded them.
  • Example: public-domain status helped spur a high-quality restoration of early comedy shorts.
  • Several notable literary works and some music (e.g., Prokofiev, Shostakovich) entering public domain are celebrated; long life+70 terms are criticized as excessive.

New Works Born into the Public Domain

  • A small press is publishing new books directly into the public domain.
  • Questions raised: how to sustain editing/marketing costs if anyone can resell; whether authors can realistically make a living this way.
  • Replies suggest: sales of physical books, reputational benefits, and treating writing as a side gig or gift economy contribution.
  • Legal discussion notes that in US/UK law, “renouncing copyright” is murky; licenses like CC0/MIT-0 approximate public-domain-like freedoms, but full abandonment may not be firmly settled.

Broader Policy and Cultural Reflections

  • Many criticize copyright length as far beyond any reasonable incentive period and unlike patents’ fixed 20 years.
  • Some argue Disney’s lobbying locked up culture largely for marginal additional revenue, effectively delaying public access for entire generations.
  • Others note that strong enforcement threats and litigation costs make the US public domain “theoretical” for anyone without significant resources.
  • There is disappointment that most people will die before the works that shaped them become freely reusable.