Sujet : Re: A bottomless pit of plagiarism
De : kludge (at) *nospam* panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
Groupes : rec.arts.sf.fandom rec.arts.sf.moviesDate : 15. Jun 2025, 18:22:48
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Former users of Netcom shell (1989-2000)
Message-ID : <102mvh8$1fa$1@panix2.panix.com>
References : 1 2 3 4
Disney has long been in the business of taking old classics and=20
copyrighting them as their own. Many of them not technically=20
plagiarism, since the originals were never copyrighted. Snow White and=20
Cinderella, to name two off the top of my head.
>
IANAL, but my understanding of this would be:
1. The stories as such are not copyrighted.
2. A particular book containing the stories may be copyrighted as
regards any essays, notes, illustrations, etc added to the book by its
publisher.
3. A movie based on a book is copyrightable as such, whether the book
was copyrighted or not. Of course, if it was, the rights to make the
movie would have to be acquired.
My objection is not necessarily that they are using old stories from the
public domain. Shakespeare did that.
However, having read both Othello and the story _Un Capitano Moro_ that the
plot was taken from, I think Othello is a far better work. Shakespeare took
a good idea with a mediocre workup and turned it into something great.
Disney, however, takes great works and ruins them. That's my objection.
Whoever decided to tack a happy ending on to Hunchback of Notre Dame deserves
to be thrown in the catacombs.
And Disney does not really give credit to the sources... so many people today
think Cinderella was originally a Disney story. That is another layer of
shame.
--scott
-- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."