Man v Mouse

Proud Boy Lite, Hair Hawley

Jeebus, this will be wild:

Sen. Josh Hawley introduced a bill on Tuesday that aims to revoke Disney’s copyrights, as Republicans are seeking to outdo each other in attacking the “woke” corporation.

Hawley’s bill would dramatically rewrite U.S. copyright law, shortening the total term available to all copyright holders going forward by several decades. It would also seek to retroactively limit Disney’s copyrights, effectively stripping the company of much of its intellectual property, in a move that would face several legal obstacles.

“That is a blatantly unconstitutional taking of property without compensation,” said Prof. Paul Goldstein, an intellectual property expert at Stanford Law School.

[snip]

The retroactive provision of the bill applies to any entertainment company with a market capitalization above $150 billion. Disney’s market cap is $196 billion.

In 1998, Disney lobbied heavily for the extension of copyright for works made for hire, such that critics dubbed the bill the Mickey Mouse Protection Act. The character first appeared in “Steamboat Willie” in 1928, and was set to enter the public domain in 2003. The act extended the term from 75 years to 95 years. The character — at least, the original black-and-white version — is now set to lose copyright protection on Jan. 1, 2024. (Disney would still retain copyright to later versions of the mouse.) There is no indication that Congress is interested in further extending copyright at this point.

Disney will stuff him in a locker between classes.

That said, the copyright laws are ridiculous and so much has been withheld from public domain for decades (thank you Sonny Bono!) and has kept creators from expanding on pop culture. Anyone else remember the ’90s and how suddenly musicians could no longer “sample” from old songs? That was the new copyright clamping down.

This entry was posted in Proud Boi-Lite Sen. Josh Hawley. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Man v Mouse

  1. MDavis says:

    So – would this retroactive (a bullshit idea for legal issues, since there is no way an entity outside a Philip K. Dick or H. G. Wells novel could comply with a law that is not yet enacted) proposal be null for any years that Disney’s market cap was less than $150B? That would be something like charging someone with underage drinking, retroactively, for drinking on their 21st birthday because the day before they hadn’t been of age.
    One of the arguments I could see being made is that Disney would not have reached the $150B market cap target if copyright were shortened to less then 3 decades. Think they would have reached that number anyway? Yeah, prove it. This would render the market cap provision moot, so copyright would have to apply to everyone or, at least, apply only going forward.
    Then, again, this is the same body, IIRC, that committed attainder against ACORN for registering voters according to the laws regarding voter registrations, so maybe I’m not seeing this correctly.

    Liked by 2 people

    • The official legal term is ‘bill of attainder’ and is expressly prohibited by the Constitution. THOSE words are in it.

      Just amazing, open, and unapologetic fascism from Untersturmbanfurher Hawley.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. w3ski4me says:

    Amazing. Disney really gave him a melvin and he can’t get over it. Old enough to be elected but he never grew up enough to handle it.
    If he wasn’t so obnoxious I’d almost feel sorry for him.
    w3ski

    Liked by 1 person

  3. roket says:

    Looks to me like he taking his own gawd’s revenge into his own hands.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. osirisopto says:

    Sen. Josh Hawley introduced a bill on Tuesday that aims to revoke Disney’s copyrights,

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

    Liked by 3 people

Comments are closed.