Popeye and Tintin enter the public domain in 2025 along with Faulkner, Hemingway

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Key 20th-century works such as early Tintin comics, Popeye, and books by Faulkner and Hemingway are entering the public domain in the US in 2025, prompting debate over how long copyright should last and how it shapes culture and access to literature. Commenters explore practical impacts, from schools still paying for scripts and textbooks despite abundant free classics, to the legal complexities of using only the earliest versions of characters while later depictions remain protected, especially across different jurisdictions. Many expect a surge of derivative works—ranging from sincere adaptations to horror parodies and AI‑generated art—while arguing that current copyright terms favor large rights holders over creators and the public.

Education and school use

  • Some expect more free literature for schools; others argue curricula already rely heavily on public-domain works and cheap editions, so little change.
  • Schools’ tight budgets make it hard to replace sets of books with new copyrighted titles.
  • Drama programs sometimes pay hundreds or thousands for popular branded plays, even when public-domain alternatives exist; motivations range from student interest and “safe” appeal to accessibility and ease of working with modern scripts.

What actually enters the public domain

  • Only works from 1929 are affected now (e.g., early black‑and‑white Tintin, early Popeye), not later color editions or later character developments.
  • Later revisions added substantial changes (e.g., updated technology, color, reputation “rehabilitation”), which remain under copyright.
  • Some details matter: the public‑domain Popeye predates the spinach gimmick, and only the earliest Mickey design is free; newer visual traits remain protected.
  • Trademarks do not expire, so character names and branding can still be legally sensitive.

Jurisdiction and legal complexity

  • Users discuss that early Tintin becomes public domain in the US but not in the EU/UK, where terms are longer (often life+70).
  • A derivative made lawfully in a short‑term country might infringe if exported to a long‑term country.
  • For sound recordings, US federal and state rules create extra complexity, with some unpublished recordings under state law.

Derivative works, parody, and horror adaptations

  • Public domain enables non‑ or minimally‑transformative uses (e.g., accessibility edits, straightforward sequels) that would be risky under fair use.
  • Very transformative horror parodies (e.g., slasher versions of children’s characters) probably could have existed under fair use even before expiry; opinions differ on how strong that defense would be.
  • Participants expect more remixes, games, and films using newly free characters; some cite existing Tintin parodies and fan comics.

Tintin fandom, nostalgia, and critique

  • Many express deep nostalgia for Tintin, Asterix, and related European comics used both for pleasure and language learning.
  • Others highlight racist and stereotyped depictions in early Tintin and similar works, seeing them as “of their time” yet uncomfortable now.
  • There is interest in “modernized” or edited versions that soften problematic content, though some note this can effectively reset copyright.

AI and style issues

  • People anticipate an explosion of AI‑generated Tintin‑style art once legal risk drops.
  • Some image models already approximate the “ligne claire” style; others historically struggled.
  • Major AI services enforce style and copyright safeguards, refusing prompts that directly mimic certain named artists, though open‑source models or fine‑tuning can bypass this.

Copyright duration debate

  • Multiple commenters argue current terms (e.g., life+70, 95‑year corporate terms) are excessive, favor large rightsholders, and slow cultural reuse.
  • Suggested alternatives range from 25–30 years for most works to differentiated terms by medium (shorter for films/software, longer for books).
  • Others note that international treaties and EU harmonization, not just one company’s lobbying, drove long terms; some point to strong publisher interests in countries like Germany.