 | |
| Mickey is Free and now his name is Free Willie! |
It's been a year since the first incarnation of Walt Disney's iconic character, Mickey Mouse, has been in the public domain, spawning waves of projects created by other people including horror slop, a cool boomer shooter, cash grab NFTs, memes, and mini-comics.
Why was the Mickey Mouse character so important in becoming public domain?
The significance of the Mickey Mouse character in the discussion surrounding the public domain cannot be overstated. Since his debut in 1928, Mickey Mouse has been a symbol of entertainment and nostalgia, but he has also remained under corporate control for over 90 years. This long duration of copyright protection has largely been a result of persistent lobbying efforts by large corporations, particularly Disney, which have successfully influenced the enactment of new copyright extension laws. These laws have allowed corporations to extend their control over characters and creative works, often well beyond the lifespans of their original creators.
As Mickey Mouse approaches the threshold for entering the public domain, many are advocating for a shift towards more equitable practices that honor the spirit of creativity and ensure that cultural icons remain accessible to the public after a reasonable period of protection, rather than being indefinitely monopolized by large corporations. This situation underscores the tension between protecting intellectual property and promoting cultural enrichment for society as a whole.
What can you legally do with the character?
On January 1, 2024, the copyrights of the first three animated Mickey Mouse cartoons and their portrayal of Mickey Mouse expired, and they entered the public domain. They are the silent versions of the cartoons Plane Crazy and The Gallopin' Gaucho, as well as the sound cartoon Steamboat Willie.
Meaning, you can only use the 1939 version of the character from Steamboat Willie as later versions of the character are still under copyright.
What have people have been doing to the character so far?
Indie film and game studios have predominantly been producing mediocre horror slop to capitalize on characters from public domain works, such as "The Mouse Trap," "Screamboat Willie," and "Infestation: Origins." However, one indie game has garnered attention for its creative take on a public-domain character.
"Mouse: P.I. for Hire" is a first-person boomer shooter loosely inspired by character designs from the early Mickey Mouse cartoons. Another intriguing title is "Bad Cheese," a psychological horror game that approaches the genre with a body-horror and Lovecraftian twist. Both games are set to be released sometime this year.
On forums like 4chan, there are discussions depicting Mickey as a liberated figure, free from the constraints of large corporations. Interestingly, they have imagined him forming a friendship with Apu Apustaja, an internet public domain character depicted as a frog, leading to an unexpected crossover.
What about Oswald the Lucky Rabbit?
Most people forgot that the lucky rabbit, Oswald, is also in the public-domain as well, another character created by Disney. He's been in the public domain since 2023 and nobody noticed. Most Zoomers would recognize him, from the Epic Mickey video game.
There's been dispute and controversy regard the lucky rabbit, you can use the original 1927 design but can't the newer designs, I'm not a legal expert but many have "claim" that he's been public domain since the 1950s. Unlike Mickey, you can use his name but can't call him, "Oswald: The Lucky Rabbit". You can simply call him "Oswald", "Ozwald", or "Ozwall".
In conclusion, the public domain is a powerful tool. Instead of creating fan-made works that are copyrighted or have legal issues, we should focus on creating content based on characters and stories that are in the public domain, such as Sherlock Holmes, H.P. Lovecraft, Tarzan, and John Carter. Many mystery authors (in North America) ave written numerous of "unofficial" mystery novels using Sherlock Homes and other characters. Though, some purists prefer the original author's canonical books, but at least half of these authors use this character seriously (not counting parody). One popular story is Sherlock Homes and Jack the Ripper, using two public domain characters to create a interesting story. This spawned a popular video game.
This year, several new works will enter the public domain, including the first version of Popeye (excluding the spinach), Tintin (without red hair), Horace Horsecollar, twelve additional Mickey Mouse cartoons (including Mickey’s first talking appearance in "The Karnival Kid"), and the "Skeleton Dance" cartoon.
In the late 2020s and 2030s, we can expect to see more iconic properties become public domain, such as the original versions of Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Goofy, and Donald Duck. Notably, The Hobbit will enter the public domain by 2034, and many, including myself, are excited about that. I plan to create watercolor illustrations that honor Tolkien's lore, rather than resorting to fan-fiction.
I believe that the public domain is a valuable asset. However, I've noticed a troubling trend where some use it to distort beloved characters, as seen with the horror adaptations of Mickey Mouse and Winnie the Pooh. Unfortunately, that is the nature of public domain—it is accessible to everyone. It's impossible to dictate who should or shouldn't use a public domain property.
The fundamental idea behind the public domain is that it consists of works that are common and widely used. Many items are considered public domain by default because they have become part of everyday culture.
If you dislike how someone utilizes a public domain character, the best response is to refrain from supporting that interpretation. Ultimately, I believe that the shock value of these "corrupted" portrayals of characters like Winnie the Pooh will fade, and more thoughtful and respectful adaptations will emerge.
Æ
Comments