Should Superman be a public domain character?

Yes.

Only if Mickey Mouse is.

Once again jews ruin everything.

>>77946802
No çmarvelfags, you can't have it

>>77946802
No. No character should be public domain, ever. Why the fuck should such an important legacy character be public domain so every schmuck can exploit the character for a quick buck?

Why they are so afraid of "losing" their characters ?

most people can't sell fan stories because most people draws like shit.... and anyway most people continue to buy official DC stories or watching official Disney cartoons...

in fact it's just ONE CHARACTER who enter in the public domain... you can't use the others ones for selling your non-official stories...

> MUH WE ARE AFRAID OF LOSING MONEY !!!!

dicks

>>77946840
Stop blaiming the jews anon

>>77947169
Why?
Jews are the reason nothing goes public domain.
Disney, which is run by jews, bribes lawmakers to keep extending the public domain time because they need Mickey.
Look it up.

/pol/ is always right.

>>77946802
What are the Jews up to this time?

>>77947225
Pol go away, this is not your containment board

You are not worth an argument

I forgot who said but someone called Supes the New American Tall Tale and I see it. For that reason I want to say yes.

but >>77946872 is right, I'm sure people would drag him through the mud for a quick buck.

So maybe? Sorry for the non-answer

>>77947260
But it's literally a fact that disney is the reason why nothing goes public domain.
You have NO agrument.

>>77947290
*argument

my b

>>77947277
>I'm sure people would drag him through the mud for a quick buck.
So?
Aren't capefags used to non-canon shit and unlimited parallel universes? Bad stories get forgotten anyway.
What if you're missing out on cape Don Rosa?

>>77947328
True. Can I get a five-ten year coma so I can skip that first flood of pure shit that would be released if it happened? I'm sure after it more of the better stories would rise to the top

Yes. Just imagine how great the hypercrisis threads would be with Superman showing up everywhere.

>>77947290
You really think that's if Jews did not exist that no one would want copyright to their own character. How fucking retarded do you have to be to think something like that.

People like you are like autistic bronies,
You can't keep your autistic hate fandom to yourself, you have to interjected into everything completely unrelated because you are just that autistic

You have a containment board now scram

>>77947633
>if jews didn't exist.
But they do, and my point still stands.

Also, /pol/ is not a containment board.
A containment board would be if a group from /pol/ got their own board for being too annoying.
/mlp/ is a containment board.

>>77946802
He is one of the characters who would probably benefit the less from becoming public domain, since he has become such an icon for DC that they do seem to genuinely care about writing good Superman stories.

That said, public domain extensions should be abolished not for his sake, but for the sake of thousands of other characters (as well as designs, music pieces, etc) that are effectively put to no use except for making bucks for a handful of millionaires.

I mean, the other day I found an animation removed from Youtube because it made use of a Blues song from the 30s. And when researching about the author of the piece, I found that he had literally died on the street leaving no children in the 50s. Yet a company is still profiting from his couple of one-hits over 60 years later AND also telling others to not use the songs. How is that fair?

>>77947920
Well, after /n/ was deleted for being too racist and the former /n/ users started polluting /int/, /tv/, /r9k/ and /b/, /pol/ was created as a form of "re-containment" for the user base.

Of course, that was already too late, as the culture of /int/, /tv/ and /b/ had shifted for good due to crossposters.

So, you could say it was originally its own board with its own culture, that was shunned by most other boards, that metastasized after a failed removal attempt and is now effectively a major part of the site's culture.

Does it even matter? It's not like post-war America where DC sued Captain Marvel out of existence for a while. Everybody can shit out a Superman clone with the Superman set, a cape and chest insignia these days.

It's not like Superman himself is a guarantee of success anyway. Best you might see is some people making money off merchandise sales they don't have to pay WB for.

>>77948505
It's not a containment board because it's the only (/his/ is like a week old) politics board on the site.
/mlp/ for example is, because they shat up the primary board for their topic(/co/).

File: Superman-superman-2809005-1200-797.jpg (534KB, 1200x797px) Image search: [Google]

534KB, 1200x797px

YES

>>77946872
Why should huge and powerful corporations continue to benefit from the creativity of artists and who are long dead and had no connection to the companies that now claim ownership of their work?

>>77946802
good lord, no
who the fuck on their right mind would want that?

>>77946872
Why should big brother government prevent people from using a concept that's been around 1938?

Take your protectionism back to Russia, commie.

>>77949727
when you use the word corporation like its a bad thing you invalidate anything you say

>>77946802
You could just make the early Superman (the one who can't fly, so everything before Action Comics #65) public domain and DC will be able to keep a Superman who has a Fortress of Solitude, Braniac, Supergirl, Lana Lang, Cat Grant, and so on.

Although since the Fleischer Superman cartoons are public domain it would mean that people would still be allowed to do public domain Superman who could fly, but DC would still have a lot of stuff to make theirs distinctive.

Also there were some Superman comic strips that are public domain but I forgot which ones.

>>77946802
Yes, just make new stories already!

You know how many shit Supes stories have been put out by DC? Imagine how many more there would be if anyone could get their grubby hands on him

File: sup fin.jpg (40KB, 314x386px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 314x386px

>>77946872
>every schmuck can exploit the character for a quick buck?

u mean like DC/Warner?

>>77946872
People exploit him for decades now.
IMO only the creator of a character should be allowed to write about him.

>>77949263
We don't really need a politics/news board, though. That sort of shit used to be discussed in /b/.

>>77950029
Nice non-argument.

>>77946802
Absolutely. If the author themselves cannot profit from the IPs they create, they should go public. Perhaps the licence could be extended to their children, but not to their grandchildren or onwards.

Sure, a lot of shitty stories would turn up since anyone could make one, but the market itself would filter them. There's reviews and previews and whatnot. Ultimately greater stories than the ones made under editorial mandate could arise, and the shitty ones would simply be forgotten.

>>77950529
>Imagine how many more there would be if anyone could get their grubby hands on him

So? If they're shit in such a public domain scenario they'll be forgotten, unlike right now where they push really shitty things and people have to accept it.

>>77948267
>since he has become such an icon for DC that they do seem to genuinely care about writing good Superman stories.
There have been no good Superman stories since AT LEAST the new 52 started. What are you talking about?

This discussion is stupid.
Make a parallel and you'll see it's rather similar to pondering if it would be right for Nintendo to still retain ownership of Mario if Shiggy Miggy died.

>>77951175
You're arguing that they should retain it then?
Don't think other developers can make good mario gamers?

>>77951175
>What if Nintendo made a Sonic game

Superman should be public domain, he's a hero of the proletariat, he should belong to everyone

>>77951085
Morrison and Pak and Johns and Giffen, but keep not reading, anon

>>77951175
That's not the question at hand though. If copyright laws were in effect in the same way they were when Superman was created he'd already be in the public domain.

>>77951085
I don't know about that, there were a few decent ones at least. I would read Morrison's and maybe Pak's and Johns' before I read the JMS Grounded chapters or chunks of the Krypton storyline again.

>>77951284
>Giffen

Eh. Well his New 52 run was better than Lobdell's or Jurgens' at least. I prefer JL3000 more though.

File: I made a mistake.jpg (26KB, 258x199px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 258x199px

>>77949571
> That wasn't a good idea, after all.

>>77949727

>Why should huge and powerful corporations continue to benefit from the creativity of artists

Because they paid them to do a job. I'm annoyed the siegels and shusters parasite families think they deserve money for something they had no hand in creating or distributing. As far as I'm concerned the suits at Warner have more rights to Superman than those cunts

>>77951286
Oh you're talking about the shift in copyright holding length?

Oh I apologize, that's actually an interesting and fairly debatable issue.
It's not obvious anywhere in the thread that's what's being discussed though, and a bunch of people are approaching the argument at face value.

Which is clearly a stupid debate.

>>77946802
Should OP's mom be public domain?

Whenever I imagine a character or property going public domain, I usually envision people utilizing them in fucked up ways. For Superman, I can see people making him into a monstrous, horrible person along the same line as stuff that happens in The Boys. A similar thing probably happened before in the actual comics for sure, but still, that's not something DC would want to happen to Superman.

>>77951437
That was my first post in the thread, I don't know if that's what OP was asking about.

>>77949571
>>77951365
dude in the back right is pulling it off pretty well though

Yeah I sure want every asshole out there using Superman to sell used cars and porn. Fuck Public Domain laws

File: superman-xxx.jpg (167KB, 629x850px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 629x850px

>>77951528
>Yeah I sure want every asshole out there using Superman to sell used cars and porn. Fuck Public Domain laws

You're a complete fuckup if you're still using that excuse to complain about the public domain.

File: Fabulousman.jpg (14KB, 170x187px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 170x187px

>>77951523

>>77951399
You realize that's not what "public domain" means, right?
Siegel and Shuster's families would have no more claim to Superman than DC. Superman would be public, like Sherlock Holmes or Frankenstein's monster.

>>77951562
I don't particularly feel like digging around through porn footage, but some one please tell me. Did they do justice to "KNEEL BEFORE ZOD"?

>>77946802
If Disney hadn't fucked up copyright because of their infatuation with $$$ then everything made before 1990 would be public domain. So yes.

Besides, it's like copyrighting Jesus at this point.

>>77951472
If you always focus on the bad, you'll never do anything. What if the defining Superman story of ages is in some person's mind and he cannot create it because of copyright law?
Nobody remembers shit stories even if there are thousands, but the good ones always remain.

And don't tell me the answer is for that guy to get a job at DC (Or Marvel, or anywhere if we're talking in general and not about Superman) because they always fuck it up.

>>77951472
>Whenever I imagine a character or property going public domain, I usually envision people utilizing them in fucked up ways.

Doesn't that say more about you than the people who would use him?

>For Superman, I can see people making him into a monstrous, horrible person along the same line as stuff that happens in The Boys. A similar thing probably happened before in the actual comics for sure, but still, that's not something DC would want to happen to Superman.

Oh you mean like Injustice, where the selling point of the comic based on the video game is kind of that?

>>77951704
>What if the defining Superman story of ages is in some person's mind and he cannot create it because of copyright law?
This is fucking retarded.
People don't have the access to ends for their means all the time on a daily basis. This is why fanfics exist.

>>77951760
Yeah, and fanfics are WIDELY spread anon! And their creators get a ton of recognition for their work if they do it well!
Fuck off.

>>77947920
It's not "the jews", it's Disney. If Disney were run by Jedis or Hindus, they'd do the exact same thing.

If you want to lay anything on "the jews", start and end with Israel's domestic and foreign policies.

>>77951930
I'm sorry but what does that have to do with my response?
I wasn't ever implying that fanfic authors do badly or are scum of the earth, it's a fine medium for people who don't have ends to their means like I've previously stated.

I will kindly not fuck off.

>>77952060
The point is that getting good to the point not of fanfic-level productions, actually good, you're not going to make art that's not gonna bring you any benefits. It's your time and effort gone to waste. Sure, you made something good and that is in itself a reward. But something better is to be actually rewarded for it.
And a groundbreaking story or comic with a character like Superman is not going to be pushed by a corporation like DC, that needs to keep a certain image of all their characters as well as their interaction with their other shitton of characters, etc.
Whereas when something is public domain, that wouldn't happen.

No one is arguing that a lot of shit with Superman would emerge, if it went public. But if it doesn't happen, we're just setting ourselves up for comfy mediocrity. How much you enjoy that is up to every person.

>>77952272
I meant, "no one is arguing that a lot of shit with Superman would NOT emerge".

>>77952272
> It's your time and effort gone to waste.
It's time and effort not maximized, it's not time wasted.
You'd still be honing a craft and practicing.

I think the real point from a layman's perspective is most original ideas should be adaptable to another setting with different characters/world that can be truly your own.

If they can't be adapted in that way, then the idea probably wasn't very original or the basic premise wasn't a universal enough concept in the first place, and it missing from the public eye probably is no large loss.

>>77951472
I admittedly want Wonder Woman and other superheroines to be public domain for sake of the porn.

>>77946802
Nah. Anyone can just change his name and slightly alter the origin and get away with it. You don't need need him specifically.

>>77951528
Is there such a thing as "public domain laws"? I thought there were only "intellectual property laws" that keep things from being public domain.

>>77952389
>>77952502
While character ripoffs (using the term in an endearing way) can get recognition - like House MD, for example - it's slightly different for superhero comics. Superman clones especially get panned and fall into relative obscurity fast, making a Superman story with another name is not something that's likely to garner huge success even if it's good.

>>77952502
Superheroes are a bit lax with this. Particularly DC's.

But do you think I could get away with commercializing a not-Mickey without getting sued?

>>77951399
Nigger, don't you ever smack talk the names of Shuster and Seigel on this fucking board. They got ripped the fuck off, and DC bought the rights, ALL the rights to the worlds most profitable superhero for $130. They took advantage of them, and made next to no effort to properly compensate them, while both Jerry and Joe died near the poverty line.

Their families fighting for the rights isn't just a money thing, it's a fight for what's humanely decent.

Make Supes public domain were be at least a step forward.

>>77952656
I'm not suggesting a clone.
And House MD is a bad example, as while it gets some inspiration from Doyle's works it is nowhere near a clone.

> making a Superman story with another name is not something that's likely to garner huge success even if it's good.
This topic's argument was about letting Superman in the public domain so people could create better stories, not doing it for the specific purpose of authors coatriding the success of the franchise.
That's exactly what most people in here seem afraid of.

File: pretentiouspollack.png (11KB, 627x248px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 627x248px

>>77948505
You forgot when /new/ existed, which is after /n/ was repurposed into its current form. But /new/ was deleted for being Stormfront 2.0 as well. I don't know what moot was thinking when he decided we need another Stormfront board, though I strongly doubt he intended for their faggotry to spread.

I mean look at this picture. Who would want pretentious faggots like this who think they're revolutionary for calling someone a degenerate kike liberal shill on a Mongolian drawings image board on their website?

Well kind of. Why shouldn't he be? Tarzan, Sherlock Holmes and Alice in wonderland are all free for the public to use, which makes sense because these characters are much more to people than 'just' the stories they were originally featured in; they have become timeless, and an integrated part of western media culture. This also goes for Superman and Batman.

But like other anon mentioned, if iconic capes should be domain, so should characters such as Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny and Popeye.

>>77953065
Tarzan is like partially public domain though. Even Sherlock Holmes is too though he's definitely more PD than Tarzan.

>>77951562
Why they didn't named it Sperman?

>>77952764
But lack of profit is effectively a deterrent for working on such a story.

I mean, the only reason to believe DC wouldn't still do their best to publish the best Superman stories in an imaginary case where he is public domain would be a diminished return in royalty-related profits.

>>77953065
>>77953121
I don't think even Lovecraft is fully public domain yet, and he's so deeply ingrained in western culture in that most people know it by the mood and setting it invokes rather than the actual content of his works.

If anything we should worry about copyright's expiring on concepts like Lovecraftian fiction before we worry about mascoty characters like Superman.

>>77953141
They've just been using the actual name plus XXX An Adult Parody tacked at the end for a long while.

>>77953231
Lack of profit is a deterrent for working on anything in life, that's a basic human concept, I don't understand what you're getting at.

And why would DC publish superman? If it was public domain it would be a bidding war on quality content in an oversaturated market.

>>77953141
Because nowadays nobody goes to the XXX Video Store, but rather just search online adult sites.

That means using puny names would result in gigantic drops in sales.

>>77953121
>partially public domain
How does that work? I don't know anything about these laws. I remember Disney made it impossible to use the name 'Tarzan' in the title of anything because they apparently owned it while their movie was out. People could still use the character, but they weren't allowed to use his actual name as the title or for promotion.

>>77953437
>How does that work?

The first 10 Tarzan stories are in the public domain, but the rest aren't yet. (and in the UK they may not be public domain till 2020 since it's 70 years after Burroughs' death) So the Burroughs estate still has the copyright on the rest of Burroughs' stories.

http://pdsh.wikia.com/wiki/Tarzan

Dynamite did try this, they published a comic called Lord of the Jungle and Tarzan was only named within the comic. Same with their comic Warlord of Mars, which named John Carter within the comic. ERB Inc sued but we never really found out if Dynamite would've gone all the way because Dark Horse gave up on publishing new Tarzan comics and Marvel gave up on publishing new John Carter comics.

>I remember Disney made it impossible to use the name 'Tarzan' in the title of anything because they apparently owned it while their movie was out.

It might not have been Disney but the Burroughs estate, which does have a trademark on Tarzan.

>>77953334
>And why would DC publish superman? If it was public domain it would be a bidding war on quality content in an oversaturated market.
He would get to interact with other established characters in the universe that would still be copyrighted. So, DC's Superman can still hang out with Connor Kent and fight Doomsday.

DC would still have a semblance of "canon" for its in-continuity stories that people could access to through a website.

DC would get to have some quality control over the stories backed by the Brand.

And most importantly, DC still has the resources, digital and print, to handle comic publishing at large scale as well as dozens of editors who love the medium and have tons of experience on it.. They would still be far ahead of the average Joe trying to convince his artist girlfriend/roommate to draw the webcomic for him.

I mean, DC has published "Frankenstein" comics in their main continuity and almost everyone in Fables and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was public domain.

>>77953704
>He would get to interact with other established characters
Or he could interact with Marvel and their rich universe.

All the rest of your reasons about resources are highly speculative, but if we are going to speculate, I speculate there are plenty of amateurs out there who have great supplies for publishing and networking is easier than ever in this digital age.

>>77953704
>He would get to interact with other established characters in the universe that would still be copyrighted. So, DC's Superman can still hang out with Connor Kent and fight Doomsday.

Also that brings up another question, how much of Superman would fall into the public domain? Obviously it won't be the entire package since DC is still publishing the character. We know that the Fleischer cartoons and some of the comic strips from around 1939 are in the public domain. So that means once Action Comics #1 is public domain, his origin would already be public domain, the names Kal-L and Jor-L would be part of the package (I don't know when they switched to Jor-El) and Lois as well. Luthor would be public domain when stuff from 1940 goes into the public domain.

>>77953894
>Marvel and their rich universe.
A Universe so rich it already has like 5 copies of him running around.

Plus, if Marvel can immediately create better supporting characters for Superman than DC could in the past 70 years, then they should take him by all means.

>>77953894
>Or he could interact with Marvel and their rich universe.
>Bendis
>Hickman
>Slott
>Quesada

NO, THANK YOU

>>77954248
But that's my point anon
> If it was public domain it would be a bidding war on quality content in an oversaturated market.

Yes.

The perpetual extension of copyright and trademarks is one of the singularly most retarded things to ever happen in the history of American law.

File: 1432083748215.png (46KB, 424x308px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 424x308px

>>77952837
Damn I can feel the fedora tipping from here.

>>77949263
Bottom line is /pol/ is still the cesspool where users go to pretend they're red pilled and pretend to be retarded. And Disney would still be assholes no matter who ran it.

>>77954575
>>77953704
>>77953334
If Superman goes into the public domain it likely won't the entire thing that spanned decades of publishing and media history.

It might be like Tarzan or Sherlock Holmes where a part of the stuff done by the original creators becomes PD for now.

So if, say, Superman comics and stuff from 1938 is in the public domain, then those, the Fleischer cartoons, and the 1939 comic strips would be what non-DC people use. So they'd be limited to Superman, Lois, George Taylor, the Daily Star, and whatever was in the cartoons. You also get Jimmy Olsen but he wasn't named Jimmy Olsen until the radio show.

Extend it to 1939 and you get to use the Ultra-Humanite. Extend it to 1940 and you get Luthor and Perry White. And so on.

So DC would still have a clear advantage cause they've got decades of history and unique stuff for the character that hasn't fallen into the public domain yet.

>>77946802
>Should Superman be a public domain character?

No. Making iconic characters open to use by whoever wants them diminishes their value and their integrity. Given their nature as corporate intellectual property, there is an active public interest in keeping valuable concepts and characters able to generate revenue for owners and shareholders.


>Should people be able to reprint old media if they're no longer being produced?

Abso-fucking-lutely. Now, I don't follow trade paperbacks or comic anthologies too closely, but if DC were to say "We don't want to reprint comics from 1950 or earlier", there shouldn't be anything stopping anyone else from taking a DC comic from 1945 and printing and selling it themselves, or from digitally capturing and sharing those images.

>>77947225
What's your proof other than idle racism?

>>77957033
>Abso-fucking-lutely. Now, I don't follow trade paperbacks or comic anthologies too closely, but if DC were to say "We don't want to reprint comics from 1950 or earlier", there shouldn't be anything stopping anyone else from taking a DC comic from 1945 and printing and selling it themselves, or from digitally capturing and sharing those images.

It'd be great if only to see what the original coloring looks like, a lot of the Archives look washed out.

>>77946872
So you are saying that only soulless corporate executives who are already rich should be allowed to make a quick buck off of the dreams and virtues of two teenagers?

>>77946802
No. Like all media, he should be the exclusive property of Disney™. Only Disney™ can bring audiences the magic and joy they deserve.

>>77946802

Do people even care about characters being public domain?

It's mostly WB not wanting to share shekels and zealots concerned about how their sacred cow will get butchered.

>>77959372
Why add soulless there?

>>77946872
So then you're saying that all the excellent adaptations we've had of characters like Dracula, Sherlock Holmes, Ebenezer Scrooge, and others shouldn't exist?

Because guess what, those are all public domain characters and our culture is all the better for it.

>>77960653
>Do people even care about characters being public domain?

Sure, but most people on both sides of the argument usually don't understand how the law works or what's right/wrong about it. Or at least they don't get specific about it.

>>77946802
No. Cartoon and comic characters shouldn't become public domain unless creators want them too. They don't need to become public domain and people can just make up their own characters. Things that should be public domain are stuff like advancement in technology. That's more important.

>>77965637
case in point: >>77965827

>>77947920
A containment board is a board whose content is banned from the rest of the site.

/mlp/ and /vp/ are a good example of this.

Ponyshit is bannable on every part of the site other than its designated containment board, /mlp/. However, /vp/ isn't a containment board because you can still discuss Pokemon on /v/ or /a/.

Every board that has some sort of cross-section of content with /pol/ (/int/, /news/, /biz/, and /his/) has a no politics rule.

>>77963485
They've used Sherlock Holmes in more terrible shit than anything halfway decent, Dracula is just a lazy name for old vampire, and Scrooge is just a constant retelling of the same story.

>>77969881
>making excuses

Not fooling anyone here.

>>77951562
I like how his emblem's symbol is the Hebrew aleph.

>>77965827
Most of it is, since technological innovations can't be copyrighted--only patented, and no one patents anything because patents can't be renewed. Everyone just keeps the important information top secret and sells the finished product.

>>77970602
>no one patents anything

That's patently false. There's an entire industry of lawyers fucking around with patent law with tech companies because if you can prove some device used something from a patent they don't own, you can be entitled to millions.

>>77970702
In industries where reverse engineering is piss-easy, like software development, but not in actually important industries like pharmaceuticals.

>>77969881
The terrible shit is forgotten and abandoned, the good shit adds to the character and builds on it and reflects well on every other work. BBC Sherlock is fascinating in one direction, Elementary is fascinating in another, and both throw interesting light on the original stories.

>>77946802

every universe already has their own superman, there would be no point

>>77970967
To be fair Sherlock literally changed the way that the world handled crime investigations almost entirely.

>>77970702
>patently false
I see what you did there.
>>77970826
Isn't the whole reason that that one douchebag that pushed the price for some super-specific anti-cancer drug to $750 per pill because nobody else can make the exact same drug though?

>>77946802
Yes. I can finally open my dream ice cream shop with Superman as my lead mascot without getting sued into the ground.

If anything, we need the opposite, where people are encouraged to write their own fiction instead of recycling characters and stories from over half a century ago.

>>77946802

People who want Superman to go public domain are fucking hipsters. The majority of people who would try to make a Superman story don't get what makes superheroes or the character great. There's already a bunch of shitty adaptations of superheroes in games, tv shows, movies, the only good ones are from the rare cases of people that actually gave somewhat of a shit about the comics. We'd get flooded with a bunch of garbage and something decent every once in a while.

People act like DC's treated the character so shittily when he's gotten tons of good stories over the last few decades, a tv show, movies, etc.

A little bit of Batcirclejerking doesn't change that.

>>77971279
Separate issue there. Anyone can make the drug, but the FDA approval process for the maker and the factory is long, complicated and expensive.

>>77971506
Sounds like damage control from an intern

>>77971475
Yes because restricting the public domain will prevent relaunches and reboots. Oh wait.

>>77971506
You've illustrated perfectly, though unintentionally, why characters as old and established being held under copyright is unnecessary. The system is broken. DC has more than had the required period to establish themselves as the best at writing the Superman character. They should no longer require a monopoly under law to maintain a market share.

>>77972111

Damage Control is Marvel you fuckin' shmuck

>>77946933
This. No one is going to go for public domain shit when it's all low quality slop. People in general also care far more for 'the real deal' than businesses give them credit for.

The HISTORY behind a thing matters a lot to most people.

>>77950559
You're not fooling anyone, DBZtard, Goku lost the Death Battle, get over it.

>>77972298
I want Johns to write Superman forever tbph pham

>>77972159
Anyone can write Superman stories. Anyone at all. If someone has an idea for a Superman story they can write that story down, no problem. DC just has a monopoly on profiting from Superman stories. No one's freedom of expression is being stepped on.

A lot of iconic characters are already fair use and are used, albeit in a number of ways, without any payment to the rights holders OR the creators (for example, the people behind the TV show HOUSE paid nothing to anyone related to Holmes). Any number of people make money (a perfect example is how much the original, murdered Guardians of the Globe were analogs of the JLA and yet DC isn't suing Kirkman or Image. This kind of thing happens every day.

People write fan fiction pairing Clark with Lex, Bruce and Lois, Lori (the mermaid, etc.). People use Superman in songs, artwork, PSA, etc. (just as they do other icons).

The only thing DC is going to come down on is someone who was doing something like mass producing for sale say a Batfleck action figure fighting a Carvill action figure. But you sure as hell could make a stop motion video and post it on You Tube, just not sell it to Netflix.

tl;dr - yes, this is a pretty stupid discussion.

>>77946872
>Why the fuck should such an important legacy character be public domain so every schmuck can exploit the character for a quick buck?
That's all DC/WB has done and the fucking character has crumbled in every way. In universe and out. Yes Superman needs to be public domain.

>>77951042
>>77951722
>>77952656
>>77952759

Fucking this.

>>77972804
No. They can also sue you if they think your depiction of Superman would negatively impact their profits.

>>77957817
You don't know that a lot of disney stuff should be under public domain by now?