Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
DRM Movies Idle

Internet Archive Celebrates 1927 Works' Arrival in Public Domain with Short Film Contest (archive.org) 10

To celebrate this year's "Public Domain Day," the Internet Archive "asked people to submit short films highlighting anything that was going to be made available in the Public Domain in 2023." For the contest, vintage images and sounds were woven into creative films of 2-3 minutes. Many of the films were abstract while others educational, they all showcased the possibility when public domain materials are made openly available and accessible for download. "The Internet Archive has spent 24 years collecting and archiving content from around the world...now is the time to see what people can do with it," said Amir Saber Esfahani, director of special arts projects at the Internet Archive.
The counsel from Creative Commons helped judged all 47 entries, with winners finally chosen "based on creativity, technique, engagement, and variety of 1927 content."

The winning entries include "The Public Domain Race," a montage of newly-uncopyrighted 1927 film clips and cartoons. And the honorable mentions include short films showing, among other things, 2023 filmmaker Sam Dody serenading a lovestruck silent film star from 1927 — and the story of why Mae West once spent eight days in jail.

But the big first-place prize of $1,500 went to Gnats Gonzales for reciting a poem that was emblazoned over the artwork and title pages of 1927 works that have finally entered the public domain. "... Let not kings nor selective texts decide what is known among you. Ignore the temptation of hippocampal decay. Plunge into the dark depths. And feel the warmth of mortal creation at its purest."

That last quote appears over a 1927 movie poster showing a woman smashing pies into the face of Oliver Hardy.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Internet Archive Celebrates 1927 Works' Arrival in Public Domain with Short Film Contest

Comments Filter:
  • by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Saturday February 04, 2023 @11:57AM (#63265065)

    I feel like the bigger deal you make of this, you may wake up Disney and maybe even some companies that start thinking they could make money off their old assets. We will get fucked if they "purchase" enough Congresscritters to change the law once again and extend the length of copyright protection even more. They usually extend the copyrights every 20 years or so and so we're due for them to start grumbling for another extension .. given the fact that nearly all the top movies nowadays are remakes or sequels Hollywood will want to hold on to old movies.

    • by shanen ( 462549 )

      Nice FP and I hope someone mods you up.

      I say "Death to Mickey Mouse!"

    • Re:Stop doing this (Score:4, Informative)

      by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Saturday February 04, 2023 @12:55PM (#63265193) Homepage Journal

      Disney has not forgotten about copyright.

      Their characters are protected by trademark, so while copyrighted material will become fair game for reproduction, you still won't be able to use their characters' likenesses in any way that might confuse consumers. The old material serves as advertising for the new, and people who download more media also tend to pay for more media.

      In a streaming model, Disney's bread and butter are the current releases that kids watch 2304739 times in a row.

  • by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Saturday February 04, 2023 @12:05PM (#63265071)

    Because at the next round of copyright extension, they'll all be taken out of the public domain.

  • by stooo ( 2202012 ) on Saturday February 04, 2023 @12:07PM (#63265083) Homepage

    Do we reallly need creative works to be protected for over 100 years ?
    10 years would be a much more realistic compromise, where the exploiters of the creators could milk nearly all of the money.

    • by shanen ( 462549 )

      I think any fixed term is going to be inappropriate for some of material. We need to rethink the entire approach, and we have some usage-tracking technologies to help do it. I think there are two keys here:

      (1) Figuring out the proper values of two intangibles: entertainment and education.
      (2) Tracking derivative value.

      In the first case, the economic value that should go to the creator should be related to the value received by the people who enjoyed whatever was created. I included education separately becau

    • The traditional justification for copyright was to protect the earnings of the artist. This was then extended a period after the artist's death on the basis that they might have died young leaving dependents who would need their parent's flow of income to live on as they grew up. This then was lengthened to reflect the possible lifespan of the spinster daughter of the family, who couldn't be expected to fend for herself.

      Clearly this is absurd and needs to be cut back to, at most, 20 years after the death of

      • by shanen ( 462549 )

        Sad to see this relatively substantive topic attracted so little discussion on today's Slashdot...

        On your closing point, the two main contending philosophies seem to be "government of the corporations, by the lawyers, for the richest 0.1%" versus "government of, by, and for the Donald".

        Have a nice day?

  • That last quote appears over a 1927 movie poster showing a woman smashing pies into the face of Oliver Hardy.

    Oliver Hardy would roll over in his grave in embarrassment if he knew that a modern hipster overlaid poetry over the dignified image of a woman smashing pies into his face.

    • He'd roll over even more if he knew that the exploiters who made money from his genius, giving him a pittance from it while he was alive, are still making money from it 100 years later.

Avoid strange women and temporary variables.

Working...