The Creative Freedom of the Public Domain
The public domain is often misunderstood, yet it holds immense creative potential. Once a work enters the public domain, it is free for anyone to use, remix, or adapt, without asking for permission or paying royalties. This freedom fuels creativity, allowing new generations to engage with old works in ways that reflect modern sensibilities, interests, and technologies.
Traditionally, works like those of Shakespeare, Austen, or the fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm have provided endless inspiration for new adaptations. Winnie-the-Pooh and Steamboat Willie joining the public domain adds another layer to this tradition, offering new possibilities for artists to explore without legal restrictions. But the long journey these works have had to reach this point invites reflection on the way copyright law has evolved.
In the past, copyright terms were relatively short, lasting just 28 years with a possible renewal of another 28. Over time, however, laws extended the protection period to up to 95 years for corporate works, thanks to changes like the 1998 Copyright Term Extension Act. While these extensions benefited corporate entities—particularly media conglomerates—they also kept beloved characters locked away from public use for generations. Only now, with Steamboat Willie and Winnie-the-Pooh entering the public domain, can these works truly become part of the public's creative commons.
There is controversy over the change to a longer copyright term. Critics contend that these extensions limit access to cultural heritage and stifle creativity while favouring big corporations disproportionately. After all, while being integral parts of popular culture around the world, figures like Mickey Mouse have long been kept behind lock and key. However, supporters contend that lengthy copyright periods are necessary to motivate artists to keep producing new works, particularly in fields like animation, literature, and film. The true test will be whether the public may use the iconic characters from Steamboat Willie and beyond to create new art and culture without encountering legal restrictions
Mickey Mouse: More than Just a Cartoon
More than just a fictional character, Mickey Mouse is a representation of Disney's brand and a cultural phenomenon. New opportunities for innovators have arisen since the copyright for Mickey's Steamboat Willie version expired in 2024. The first silent, black-and-white Mickey made his debut in the motion picture in 1928. Now that this version is in the public domain, writers, artists, and filmmakers can freely utilise it in their creative works, transforming Mickey to suit modern values and technological advancements.
However, It's crucial to know that not all Mickey Mouse content is being released at once. The only version of Mickey that is now accessible to the general public is the 1928 original. Copyright protection is still in place for later iterations of the character, such those from Fantasia or other colourized representations. Because of this distinction, artists are free to adapt the 1928 Mickey for contemporary audiences, but they are not permitted to utilise the more current iterations of Mickey without Disney's consent.
The Role of Copyright Expiration in Creative Freedom
For each work, the copyright's expiration is a critical point that opens up the possibility of transformation. For instance, the Sherlock Holmes case demonstrates how the public domain can be continuously reimagined. Following their release into the public domain, the Sherlock Holmes stories inspired a resurgence of new adaptations, including contemporary versions such as the Sherlock TV series. The same opportunities now exist for Steamboat Willie, as the public can engage with this version of Mickey Mouse in ways that were previously impossible.
The 1928 Mickey is now accessible to everyone, but it's not as easy as it looks. For instance, Disney's ownership of Mickey's larger brand identification is still protected under trademark law. The year 1928 Mickey can be freely utilised in artistic works, but using him for commercial purposes—like selling products that feature his image—may be against the law. Since Mickey Mouse is a Disney trademark, sellers who use Mickey in a way that could mislead customers about the product's origin run the danger of facing legal action. The balance between trademark protection and creative freedom becomes more difficult to maintain when public domain characters are so intimately associated with individual brands.
The purpose of trademark law is to safeguard characters' commercial identity rather than their cultural worth, protect a brand's integrity and prevent consumers from being misled. However, this generates a complex web of legal problems when it comes to public domain characters. Trademark protections serve as a continual reminder that commercial usage of these characters is still strictly regulated, even though the public domain affords more freedom. This is especially essential as characters like Mickey Mouse become public domain.
The challenge now is how the public will use these characters while maintaining their individuality. Mickey's trademark allows creators to freely rework his 1928 version in creative works, but any attempt to earn monetarily from his image may result in controversy. In other words, the public domain provides potential for cultural creativity, but creators must exercise caution while using the characters to prevent infringing on trademarks.
These persistent inconsistencies between copyright and trademark law pose significant issues for authors, particularly as more iconic characters enter the public domain in the future years. Characters such as Donald Duck, Superman, and even James Bond will soon join Mickey in the public domain, but with each new addition, the intricacy of effectively employing these characters grows.
Brand Integrity and Dilution Risks
One concern about Mickey Mouse's transfer into the public domain is the possibility of brand dilution. Mickey has grown into a significant icon of Disney's brand, and the possibility of misuse is high. If Mickey were utilised inappropriately or negatively, it may harm the character's reputation and Disney's overall brand image.
Brand dilution is the process of weakening a brand's identity through excessive or improper association. For example, a poorly produced adaptation of Mickey Mouse could reduce his cultural relevance, transforming a beloved character into a generic figure with no meaning or connection to the values Disney created around him. While the public domain provides greater freedom, producers must be responsible for how they exploit these legendary characters, honouring the cultural and commercial legacies they represent.
The Long Road Ahead
The 1928 debut of Mickey Mouse is just the start. In the years ahead, more well-known characters will shortly come to the public domain. However, despite this, creators need to be mindful that the commercial usage of these characters is still governed by trademark law. The intricate relationship between copyright and trademark law creates a dynamic setting with enormous creative potential but equally important legal roadblocks.
The protection of creative works and copyright terms are still up for debate. The question still stands: How can copyright and trademark regulations be balanced to promote innovation while upholding creators' rights as icons like Mickey Mouse enter the public domain? This balance will determine how the public domain works in the future.
Ultimately, the public domain presents fresh chances for authors, filmmakers, and artists to reinterpret historically influential works. However, the intricacies of copyright and trademark law guarantee that creators must exercise caution in this new creative environment.
IP Round up
Google’s Willow: A Quantum Leap in Computing
Google’s quantum computing lab recently achieved a major milestone with its new chip, Willow, capable of completing a computing challenge in under five minutes — a task that would take a supercomputer 10 septillion years. This is a significant leap from 2019, when Google’s processor was 10,000 times faster than supercomputers. Willow’s 105 qubits now offer "best-in-class performance," with improved error correction, a major challenge in quantum computing. Google aims to use quantum computing for real-world applications, such as AI training, medicine discovery, and energy innovations, positioning the technology as key to future advancements. (Source: The Verge)
Mahindra Drops ‘6e’ Branding Amid IndiGo Trademark Dispute
Mahindra Electric has agreed not to use the “6E” trademark for its upcoming electric car model, the "BE 6e," until the Delhi High Court resolves the trademark infringement case filed by IndiGo. Mahindra will rebrand the car to "BE 6" but intends to contest IndiGo’s claims. IndiGo, which uses the “6e” callsign for its airline services, claims the trademark infringement over Mahindra's use of “6e.” The dispute arose after the trademark registrar accepted Mahindra’s application to register “BE 6e.” The case will be heard in April 2025. (Source: The Business Standards)
China Races Ahead in Smart Grid Patents, US and Europe Lead Innovation
A new study by the European Patent Office (EPO) and the International Energy Agency (IEA) reveals a significant surge in patents for electricity grid technologies, driven by advances in digital integration and clean energy deployment. Patents integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into smart grids have grown sixfold, with the U.S. and China leading the way. Between 2001 and 2022, innovation in grid technologies grew at a rate seven times faster than other sectors, particularly in software innovations and smart grid features like supply-demand forecasting and electric vehicle charging. While Europe and Japan currently lead in grid innovation, China has emerged as the fastest-growing player, surpassing the EU in 2022. (Source: International Energy Agency)
Internet Archive Ends 4 years of Legal Battle Over Book Scanning Program
After over four years of legal proceedings, the Internet Archive has decided not to pursue an appeal to the Supreme Court in its copyright case concerning the scanning and lending of library books. A consent judgment has been entered, leading to a financial settlement that will cover the plaintiffs' legal fees. The lawsuit, filed by major publishers in 2020, challenged the Internet Archive’s practice of scanning and lending print books without permission. The Second Circuit Court ruled that this practice was not considered fair use and amounted to copyright infringement. Despite the conclusion of this case, the Internet Archive continues to advocate for a future where libraries can legally own, lend, and preserve digital books. (Source: Publishersweekly)
Telangana and BITS Pilani Collaborate to Advance National Security Tech
The Telangana government’s T-Works and BITS Pilani Hyderabad’s Centre for Research Excellence in National Security (CRENS) have teamed up to advance national security technologies, focusing on innovation, skill development, and entrepreneurship. Their partnership will scale up prototypes, create startup ecosystems, and facilitate technology transfer. CRENS will support India’s self-reliance in national security, collaborating with defense organizations. In another initiative, HDFC Bank will partner with Telangana’s Agriculture Data Exchange (AdeX) to provide smart agri-credit to farmers. Additionally, an AI-based tool, Mitra, to combat substance abuse, will be expanded to 1,000 schools in Hyderabad. (The Hindu)
References:
Albanese, A. (2024, December 5). Internet Archive copyright case ends without Supreme Court review. Publishers Weekly. https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/publisher-news/article/96657-internet-archive-copyright-case-ends-without-supreme-court-review.html
Bailey, J. (2022, January 5). What Winnie-the-Pooh lapsing into the public domain really means. Plagiarism Today. https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2022/01/05/what-winnie-the-pooh-lapsing-into-the-public-domain-really-means/
Carlisle, S. (2014, July 15). Copyrights last too long! (Say the pirates): They don’t; and why it’s not changing anytime soon. Nova Southeastern University. http://copyright.nova.edu/copyright-duration/
Carlisle, S. (2022, January 13). “What’s Next?” Thought Pooh. “Because I Just Found Out I’m a Trademark Too!” Nova Southeastern University. http://copyright.nova.edu/pooh-trademark/
International Energy Agency. (2024, December 10). Electricity grid patents surging as countries target artificial intelligence solutions. International Energy Agency. https://www.iea.org/news/electricity-grid-patents-surging-as-countries-target-artificial-intelligence-solutions
Hiltzik, M. (2022, January 3). ‘Winnie-the-Pooh’ (born 1926) is finally in the public domain, a reminder that our copyright system is absurd. Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-01-03/winnie-the-pooh-public-domain
Jenkins, J. (n.d.). Mickey, Disney, and the public domain: A 95-year love triangle. Duke University School of Law. https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/mickey/
Mishra, B. (2024, December 9). Will not use ‘6e’ trademark: Mahindra Electric Automobile to Delhi HC. Business Standard. https://www.business-standard.com/companies/news/will-not-use-6e-trademark-mahindra-electric-automobile-to-delhi-hc-124120901094_1.html
Nanji, N. (2024, January 1). Disney's earliest Mickey and Minnie Mouse enter public domain as US copyright expires. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-67833411
Parsons, T. (2024, January 2). What Mickey Mouse's public domain debut means for copyright holders. Johns Hopkins University Hub. https://hub.jhu.edu/2024/01/02/mickey-public-domain-copyright-holders/
Roth, E. (2024, December 9). Google reveals quantum computing chip with ‘breakthrough’ achievements. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2024/12/9/24317382/google-willow-quantum-computing-chip-breakthrough
The Hindu. (2024, December 9). T-Works, BITS Pilani Hyderabad’s CRENS join hands to promote national security tech innovation. The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Hyderabad/t-works-bits-pilani-hyderabads-crens-join-hands-to-promote-national-security-tech-innovation/article68964450.ece
Xiao, C. (2022, February 22). How ‘public’ is the public domain? Winnie-the-Pooh illustrates copyright limitations of public domain works. IPWatchdog. https://ipwatchdog.com/2022/02/22/public-public-domain-winnie-pooh-illustrates-copyright-limitations-public-domain-works/id=146207/
