Comment

Comment on Welcome to the Public Domain in 2025 | Internet Archive Blogs

Then go yell at Disney. Without them, I think originally copyright was domething like 20 years.

Which means this year Greg the Bunny would be public domain. What? You never heard of Greg the Bunny??? Go ask Seth Green about that. Or ask Fox why you never heard of him.

At one point Fox canceled like 20 other shows, with Greg the Bunny being one of them, between the time Fox cancelled Family Guy, and the time they brought back Family guy. All 20 of these shows ran for like 1 seaaon, or less. Andy Richter had Andy Richter Controls the Universe. I think The Tick was part of that. Ironically starring the guy who Voices Joe from Family Guy. And I think 2004 was also the year they cancelled That 70s Show. I know that one lasted way longer that 1 season, but it would mean that Fox Cancels Family Guy. Then cancels shows starring Mila Kunis, Seth Green, and Patrick Warburton all in the same year. Then brings back Family guy.

Fox is a weird company.

source

Sort:hotnew top

JWBananas@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

At one point Fox canceled like 20 other shows, with Greg the Bunny being one of them, between the time Fox cancelled Family Guy, and the time they brought back Family guy.

TL:DR youtu.be/0oMTmtN7lHI?si=Q3IF3TDij6jkaJ8t

source
shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
Also, why is it that different things enter the public domain at different times? For example, I learned of a movie from like the 1970s called The Last Man on Earth that is public domain, or at least I’m guessing it’s public domain, and yet it’s from the 1970s, where this is talking about stuff from 1929. I obviously know some stuff is made and released immediately into the public domain, such as open source software, etc. But I wouldn’t figure a movie would be like that.

source
- vonxylofon@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  Just FYI, most open source software is not in public domain, it is protected by the same copyright we are talking about here, except the author made it available under certain conditions (the licence).
  
  source
  - shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    Good point, I didn’t even think of that because the GPL and MIT are so permissive.
    
    source
    vonxylofon@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    The MIT is, but GPL is actually very restrictive. For example, it disallows publishing derivative works without those being licensed under the same terms (or newer GPL versions). That’s why commercial companies are reluctant to use GPL-licensed code in their products.
    
    source
- schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  This has to do with how copyright laws changed over time, for example there used to be a requirement in the US for works to have a copyright notice, or for copyright to be renewed, so some things that didn’t meet those requirements became public domain earlier than they could have if the copyright holder had cared about all the formalities.
  
  source