Talk:2024 in public domain

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Literature Low‑importance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Years Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Millions of Cats

notable enough? Arlo James Barnes 08:01, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disney

I removed Plane Crazy because, per the article, the test screening version is lost and the final version enters the public domain in 2025, I removed mention of Tigger because it's redundant to the mention of the The House at Pooh Corner, and I added Abie's Irish Rose because it is one of the 15 highest grossing silent films per Variety. Hekerui (talk) 12:39, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello. How do we know that Tolkien's works in Canada, Belarus and all the other countries about the 50 years will become public domain? Can somebody answer my question? I don't know if anyone understands my question. Did I say it right or not? Γιάννης Ευαγγελίου (talk) 17:52, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I asked some questions which remain unanswered. Will somebody answer my questions or not? Γιάννης Ευαγγελίου (talk) 20:16, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's based on his death year in those countries, see List of countries' copyright lengths (you will find Canada changed its length). Hekerui (talk) 08:17, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

I reverted because the reordering put names out of order and the picture made the table unwieldy/breaks the page formatting. Hekerui (talk) 21:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Countries with life + 80 years

Hi, The list in this table doesn't make sense. We should only list there works from 80 years pma countries. Spain following the Rule of the shorter term, all works from non-Spanish authors in the public domain in their country of origin are also in the public domain there. Yann (talk) 09:11, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But that is not how copyright law works – it does not matter where a work was created or where the author was born. For example, Beatrix Potter's works are currently still copyrighted within Colombia, and they will enter the Public Domain within Colombia on 1 January 2024. The "country" column in our table is misleading and should probably be removed. Gnom (talk) 09:14, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's how it works. What does matter is the place of publication. Please read copyright and c:Commons:Hirtle chart. Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:28, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From what I understand, the place of publication does not matter, except in some cases under U.S. copyright law. The Hirtle chart also only talks about the copyright law of the United States. It is entirely useless in any other place in the world. I am happy to read the English Wikipedia article on copyright, but maybe you can point me to the relevant section you are referring to. (Also, please allow me to mention that I hold a Ph.D. in copyright law.) Happy to discuss this further, it is indeed a tricky subject! Gnom (talk) 09:41, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Yes, the Hirtle chart is about the US copyright, and copyright is a very complex issue. And the country of origin does matter for most cases. Actually the relevant article about international copyright is Berne Convention. For any document to be uploaded to Commons, it should be in the public domain in the country of origin and in USA, and we use the Berne Convention to determine the copyright status of a work. For example, for a work first published in USA, US law will apply, whatever is the author's nationality (e.g. The Little Prince, published in New York in 1943 by French author Antoine de Saint-Exupéry who died in 1944, is in the public domain almost everywhere, except in USA and in France).

This article is about the copyright worldwide, so the tables should reflect the copyright status in the country of origin. If the article would be about the copyright in USA, the date of death doesn't matter, so we could remove all these tables. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:42, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is how we deal with uploads on Commons on a practical level. However, the Berne Convention does not work like that. Instead, please consider the following two examples, which I am allowing myself to repeat:

Beatrix Potter's works are in the Public Domain almost everywhere in the world, but they currently still copyrighted within Colombia, and they will enter the Public Domain within Colombia on 1 January 2024.
The works of Nobel laureate Pearl S. Buck, who died in 1973, will enter the Public Domain within New Zealand on 1 January 2024, while remaining copyrighted almost everywhere else in the world.

As you can see, the place of publication does not matter at all here. Gnom (talk) 11:35, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But you forget to take into account the rule of shorter term, which I linked above. And we don't care if a work enters in the public domain in New Zealand, if it is under a copyright almost everywhere else. That's the whole point of this page. We want to list works which enter the public domain almost everywhere, and only them. Otherwise the article is useless. Yann (talk) 19:05, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Yann, sorry for not replying earlier. I started digging, and ended up in a rabbit hole. Let me bring up a new example, for which I have the appropriate footnotes:

The film Steamboat Willie enters the Public Domain in the United States in 2024.
It will also enter the Public Domain in countries that apply the rule of the shorter term.
However, it will not enter the Public Domain in countries that are signatories of bilateral copyright agreements of the United States, including, for example, Germany, where the Agreement of 15 January 1892 between the German Reich and the United States of America on the mutual protection of author's rights bars the application of the ROTST.
In consequence, Steamboat Willie will remain protected in a whole bunch of jurisdictions, including Germany, until the end of 2041.

--Gnom (talk) 09:27, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but that doesn't change anything about what I say above. This is a table showing which works enter the public domain in 2024 in their country of origin, and only them. Yann (talk) 17:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just jumping in here after seeing the edits early this morning NZ time. The article says "Since laws vary globally, the copyright status of some works are not uniform" and under the 50 year countries "..a work enters the public domain 50 years after the creator's death." It seems pretty clear from that, that the article is listing works that enter the public domain in countries with that rule, not globally. The country of origin is not relevant - the fact is that Tolkien and Picasso are both in the public domain in New Zealand, most of Asia and a few other countries. I can't see anywhere in the article that says it is a list of works that are entering the public domain in their country of origin - you're adding a criteria that just isn't there. Arjoll (talk) 22:39, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Its a table showing which (famous) works are (generally) PD where, with the obvious caveat that terms differ, so something can be PD in some places but not in others. Past practice shows this clearly, as does the inclusion of artists from countries with shorter terms in the tables for longer terms. Its not intended to be a guide to what you can put on Commons, or to definitively resolving copyright status across international borders.-- IdiotSavant (talk) 22:53, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't make sense. So you want to list all authors who died in 1973 in this table? Yann (talk) 00:18, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All the interesting ones, at least. Just as the "life + 70" table includes a wide range of interesting authors who died in 1953. IdiotSavant (talk) 01:05, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then that's where you start falling. How do you define "interesting"? We need objective criteria, not subjective ones. Yann (talk) 12:54, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

আশিকুর রহমান (সিয়াম)

আশিকুর রহমান সিয়াম হচ্ছে বাংলাদেশের একজন কন্টেন্ট কিউটের তিনি ২০২৪ সালে প্রথম জানুয়ারিতে কনটেন শুরু করেন তিনি মূলত ফেসবুক ইউটিউব ইনস্টাগ্রাম টুইটার ইত্যাদিতে কাজ @ 103.139.18.75 (talk) 16:14, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Russian authors

A couple of editors have attempted to delete Russian authors from the life + 70 years list, as Russia has a longer copyright term. This misunderstands the purpose of the lists: to list creators whose works will be in the public domain in countries with a particular copyright term. This is completely independent of their country of origin, and it is meant to be understood that copyright status will vary from country to country as different countries have different laws. To use one of the deleted examples: Joseph Stalin died in 1953. His works are thus public domain in countries with a life+70 year term. They are also still in copyright in Russia, due to its bonus 4 years for world war 2 - but that is simply not relevant to what the table is intended to show.

Looking back, this issue also arose in 2019. It was handled at the time by adding a note to the boilerplate for life+70 years. Alternatively, we could add a section on "other copyright terms", or encourage editors with an interest in the public domain in Russia to star their own list.-- IdiotSavant (talk) 10:35, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I protected the article, so I am not going to take any sides in the dispute, just wanted to confirm that Russia indeed has pma+74 years for this death year. Ymblanter (talk) 10:41, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not in dispute. The question seems to be whether Russian law should determine what goes on a list of what is public domain in places that aren't Russia. Obviously, I don't think it should. Its the same problem we are having upthread under "Countries with life + 80 years", and it should have the same answer: include creators by their copyright status under the regime in question, not exclude them if they are still in copyright in their country of origin.--IdiotSavant (talk) 11:06, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think what we need is a better clarification of the scope of this page. It's just not clear enough. @Yann and maybe some others seem to have an understanding that is just not reflected well enough on the page. I would also like to discuss Stalin and Prokofieff specifically, but maybe we can put that in a separate thread. Gnom (talk) 11:17, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To make sense, the tables should show the situation in the countries of origin. So for Russia, we need a separate table. Yann (talk) 12:52, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A separate table for Russia may be a useful idea. But Russian creators should still be listed in the other tables, because their copyright status in those countries does not depend on their copyright status in Russia. To use the specific example, Stalin and Prokofiev have entered the public domain in life + 70 countries, despite still being locked up in Russia (and they have been public domain in life + 50 countries for 20 years). Likewise Tolkien entered the public domain in Aotearoa, South Africa, and other life + 50 countries, despite still being in copyright in the UK. IdiotSavant (talk) 22:12, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This page should show the situation in a majority of countries. So copyright law in Russia is an exception, like the war extension in France, while Tolkien are not in the public domain in a majority of country. Yann (talk) 14:55, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's why we have seperate tables covering the two main cases (life + 50 and life + 70). In terms of numbers, 109 counties use life + 50. So Tolkien very much is public domain in the majority of countries. IdiotSavant (talk) 21:40, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Steamboat Willie in Europe

Will the first depiction of Mickey enter the public domain in European countries? Like UK or France. Ricardo.Pazos. (talk) 11:31, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ricardo.Pazos.: The answer is actually complicated. In most European countries, "Steamboat Willie" has entered the Public Domain on 1 January 2024. But some of them, like e.g. Germany, signed bilateral international treaties with the United States dating as far back as the 1890s (!), which extend the protection of "Steamboat Willie" until 2042 (70 years after the death of co-creator Ub Iwerks). I have explained this in a different thread on this page, and also wrote a German-language Wikipedia article and a story on the Wikimedia Deutschland blog about this. For the UK and France, I believe the situation is similar, but I have not checked this in detail. Gnom (talk) 11:47, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Ricardo.Pazos. (talk) 11:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The case of Stalin and Prokofiev under Russian copyright law

Hi, I am opening a separate threat to discuss the duration of Stalin's and Prokofiev's copyrights under Russian copyright law.

Prokofiev

For Prokofiev, who died in 1953, my understanding is that his copyright lapsed on 1 January 2004, because Russia still adhered to a 50-year copyright term at that time, and the 70-year copyright term was only introduced later in 2004. At least this is how I understand Copyright law of the Russian Federation#Duration of copyrights. Is that correct?

Stalin

For Stalin, is the case different because he was deemed to have fought in WWII?, so he got a four-year extension?

Thanks, Gnom (talk) 11:36, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The provision is "worked during of fought in" the war. Prokofiev worked during the war. Ymblanter (talk) 11:42, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And, if I remember correctly, when the law about the four year provision was adopted, it was made retroactive. Ymblanter (talk) 11:44, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So both Stalin's and Prokofiev works remain protected under Russian copyright law until 31 December 2027? Gnom (talk) 12:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would say so. Ymblanter (talk) 12:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]