In this thread the question arises about what the effect would be if the copyright had been allowed to expire on the first Batman comics, given that the character is trademarked. RealityChuck and Chronos propose that you would be permitted to reproduce the actual issues as they entered the public domain, but that you couldn’t do anything else. I’m not convinced this is true. My understanding is that you couldn’t use the name or image of Batman in promoting your work or imply approval by the owner of the trademark, but that you could create derivative works, provided that they duplicated only elements found in the public domain works or in your imagination or real life, and nothing that was only found in copyrighted works.
Superman is also a trademarked character from DC Comics, and although his early comics books are not public domain, the popular radio show from the 30s and 40s is, as are the Fleischer/Famous Superman cartoons. And indeed, people duplicate and distribute those freely. What if I wanted to edit the cartoons together into a single feature, like early 80s theatrical cartoon movies? (Heathcliff, I’m looking at you!) What if I wanted to create a stage adaptation of the radio show? What about new stories that only use elements from those sources?
Would it matter that those sources are themselves derivative works of the still-copyrighted early comic books? Could I use Perry White and Jimmy Olsen, who originated on the radio show, but not Superman himself or Lois Lane, who were first depicted in the comics? Jimmy Olsen and Perry White are also trademarks of DC Comics, BTW. Could I do a Gotham-style tv show about Perry and Jimmy working at the Planet before Clark and Lois come along?
What you’re describing is Gotham. Note that DC is behind that.
Basically, if you create a comic or other creative work using the trademarked names, then you go up against trademark law.
There’s also precedent that merely reprinting the public domain issues could be a trademark violation, though the case was not clear cut and the argument not completely tested.
The copyright expiry law doesn’t explain what happens with a serial, that may be still in production when the first episodes run out of copyright protection…
Do you treat a serial as if it was one thing, still being made with the production of each installment ?
yes trademark adds a complication, in that you might be able to sell the copyrighted material, as long as it was devoid of apparent trademarks… Trademarks expire as soon as no one botheres to renew it… Its not much of a test of validity, but the purpose is to protect the ongoing business, so they are very strong when there is the ongoing business. Not sure if the law says anything about measuring strength, but the court would be thinking ’ whats the purpose of this law ? ’ . So if Superman is still a marketed trademark for DC, then DC should be protected ?
Sherlock Holmes stories were printed until 1927, but everything before 1923 is in the public domain. So is the Sherlock character in the public domain? A recent court decision said that yes, Sherlock is in the public domain but that new elements to the series introduced from 1923 on remained under copyright.
There is no renewal for trademarks; they continue as long as the product is manufactured and can effectively go on forever. There’s no renewal anymore for copyright either, for that matter. I have no idea what you’re trying to say in the rest of that paragraph, though.
Somebody already mentioned the legality of parody. Seth Green from Robot Chicken did an interview on WTF Podcast were he got into some detail about how they work with/around the rules. You can do a lot with Superman… so long as it is crazy enough!
