|
Post by Prince Hal on Jun 29, 2017 14:00:32 GMT -5
|
|
Crimebuster
CCF Podcast Guru
Making comics!
Posts: 3,959
|
Post by Crimebuster on Jun 29, 2017 15:19:52 GMT -5
I actually saw an issue of Wyatt Earp the other day!
It's real!
|
|
|
Post by urrutiap on Jun 29, 2017 15:51:30 GMT -5
Those sites you mentioned they don't have the certain wyatt earp comic I'm looking for.
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Jun 29, 2017 16:56:30 GMT -5
WYATT EARP! HE MAKES ME BURP! Wyatt Earp also appeared as one of the features in Gunsmoke Western, which I collected for a while in the 1990s. My favorite cover was #56, credited to Kirby/Ditko by CBD.
|
|
|
Post by urrutiap on Jun 29, 2017 17:17:28 GMT -5
the Wyatt Earp comic that Im looking for has an issue where he fights the Durfee gang. its issue 26 or 29 of some old wyatt earp comic from an old comic company based on Marvel back in the 1950s
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Jun 29, 2017 18:09:03 GMT -5
Marvel still has the copyright on the Wyatt Earp book you're looking for, that's why it isn't on the legitimate free scan sites.
|
|
|
Post by urrutiap on Jun 29, 2017 18:47:18 GMT -5
Oh come on. How can Marvel have copyright rights for Atlas? Atlas is old ancient stuff.
Epic and Star maybe Marvel still have copyright yada but Atlas?
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jun 29, 2017 18:59:01 GMT -5
Oh come on. How can Marvel have copyright rights for Atlas? Atlas is old ancient stuff. Epic and Star maybe Marvel still have copyright yada but Atlas? Aren't we at 70 years now in the US?
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jun 29, 2017 22:58:37 GMT -5
Oh come on. How can Marvel have copyright rights for Atlas? Atlas is old ancient stuff. Epic and Star maybe Marvel still have copyright yada but Atlas? Aren't we at 70 years now in the US? 95 years. I don't anticipate anything will ever again go into the Public Domain.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jun 30, 2017 6:24:14 GMT -5
Say, Slam, how does copyright work when it's held by a company that technically cannot die? At what moment does the clock start?
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jun 30, 2017 9:27:55 GMT -5
Say, Slam, how does copyright work when it's held by a company that technically cannot die? At what moment does the clock start? Copyright on "work for hire," so most comics, films, tv shows, etc, is for 95 years from the date of publication or 120 years from the date of creation. As a practical matter the latter is almost never used. For works that are not "work for hire" it is the life of the author plus 70 years. As best I can tell, works that were initially copyrighted by a corporation, but were renewed by the author (Asimov's short stories, for example) are fixed at the 95 year term.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,212
|
Post by Confessor on Jul 2, 2017 7:30:48 GMT -5
Aren't we at 70 years now in the US? 95 years. I don't anticipate anything will ever again go into the Public Domain. I agree, Slam. Too much money to be made by someone or other to allow these creations to become public domain in the way that old works of fiction used to do. Myself, I'm kinda torn on the issue because, on the one hand, I can fully understand why corporations or family estates would want to keep hold of these lucrative golden geese, but on the other hand, public domain characters enrich our whole culture. Having a temporary monopoly on the commercial exploitation of a fictional character, film, or book etc, is a great idea for the creator for a good 70 years or however long, but after that, it's right for the work to become public cultural property for the express purpose of encouraging new creation and interpretation. That's to say nothing of how public domain works enrich schools and libraries. But, would I feel the same if my grandfather had created...I dunno, Buck Rogers or written Breakfast at Tiffany's, and my family were still doing very nicely out of the proceeds, thank you very much? Probably not.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jul 2, 2017 13:20:33 GMT -5
95 years. I don't anticipate anything will ever again go into the Public Domain. I agree, Slam. Too much money to be made by someone or other to allow these creations to become public domain in the way that old works of fiction used to do. Myself, I'm kinda torn on the issue because, on the one hand, I can fully understand why corporations or family estates would want to keep hold of these lucrative golden geese, but on the other hand, public domain characters enrich our whole culture. Having a temporary monopoly on the commercial exploitation of a fictional character, film, or book etc, is a great idea for the creator for a good 70 years or however long, but after that, it's right for the work to become public cultural property for the express purpose of encouraging new creation and interpretation. That's to say nothing of how public domain works enrich schools and libraries. But, would I feel the same if my grandfather had created...I dunno, Buck Rogers or written Breakfast at Tiffany's, and my family were still doing very nicely out of the proceeds, thank you very much? Probably not. One thing that most people don't realize is that Public Domain is the default position. There was no common-law copyright. Copyright is a creature of statute and the first copyright laws were enacted to protect publishers. Based on this, you had to ACTIVELY copyright your work to protect it until the beginning of the rise of multi-media empires. I have no issues with protecting creators and allowing them and their family the benefit of their creations. But at some point the control becomes so attenuated from the creator that it's ridiculous. I find it particularly ironic that one of the main players in the continued expansion of copyright is Disney, a company that benefited enormously from mining and using the Public Domain for its movies. The rise of mass-media/work-for-hire mediums such as film, television and comic books, along with the consolidation of music-publishing rights has essentially put the cultural history of the 20th Century in a half-dozen or so corporations. Looking at a specific example, Edgar Rice Burroughs is interesting as his early work fell into the public domain and his later work was saved. The last of Burroughs' children died forty years ago. His most prominent grand-child died almost a decade ago. So we are at a point where we are benefiting his great-grandchildren, all of whom were born after Burroughs died...if we are benefiting them at all, because the rights are held by Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. and I can't be arsed to figure out who the shareholders are. Counter-example, looking at important SF creators, is Mary Shelley and Frankenstein. The book obviously fell in to the public domain and as a result we have had the diverse tapestry of the use of the character...from the brilliant (Frankenstein '31, Young Frankenstein) to the absurd (Jesse James Meets Frankenstein's Daughter). We as a people have been enriched in film, television, comics and books because the character has been available rather than being controlled by some shirt-tail relative many generations removed or, more likely, a multi-national corporation.
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Jul 2, 2017 21:44:20 GMT -5
There is a downside to the public domain issue and that can easily be seen in the world of film and home video
There have been quite a number of films, even through the 1950's, that have fell into public domain. Which means, any company can release that film into the marketplace on DVD. So certain films have have been distributed from dozens of companies, cheaply priced and in horrible condition. Grainy, edited, scratched, terrible audio, blurred..many times unwatchable. And there is no incentive for anyone to remaster the film since the market is flooded with that title.
Some of the most popular public domain movies include
D.O.A. Night Of The Living Dead His Girl Friday A Farewell To Arms Angel And The Badman Dementia 13 Strange Love Of Martha Ivers Father's Little Dividend Detour
and many more. For any available print in decent shape, there's dozens that are horrendous. And odds are most will never be restored because they are in public domain
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,212
|
Post by Confessor on Jul 2, 2017 23:54:00 GMT -5
There is a downside to the public domain issue and that can easily be seen in the world of film and home video There have been quite a number of films, even through the 1950's, that have fell into public domain. Which means, any company can release that film into the marketplace on DVD. So certain films have have been distributed from dozens of companies, cheaply priced and in horrible condition. Grainy, edited, scratched, terrible audio, blurred..many times unwatchable. And there is no incentive for anyone to remaster the film since the market is flooded with that title. Some of the most popular public domain movies include D.O.A. Night Of The Living Dead His Girl Friday A Farewell To Arms Angel And The Badman Dementia 13 Strange Love Of Martha Ivers Father's Little Dividend Detour and many more. For any available print in decent shape, there's dozens that are horrendous. And odds are most will never be restored because they are in public domain That's kind of interesting that it's that way with film, because it's not at all that way with public domain music. I mean, yeah, every company and their mother might put out old pre-War blues records or old timey country stuff, but there will always be those labels who pride themselves on putting the stuff out in the highest possible quality (I'm thinking of labels like Yazoo, Ace and Sony). Yes, you can pick up a Robert Johnson, Blind Willie McTell or Doc Boggs album for cheap and in varying degrees of sound quality (even given its primitive source), but more discerning buyers know that you get a much better sounding and better packaged product from one of the specialist labels. Weird that the same thing hasn't happened with film.
|
|