|
I don't see why Disney would want to cancel it. It seems to be doing pretty well, the episodes are consistently good and it gives Disney their own Star Trek.
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 19:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 01:05 |
|
|
pixaal posted:
Is this even a possibility? I thought every time the copyright looks vaguely close to expiring, Disney gets it's lawyers in gear to get the laws rewritten again for them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 19:37
|
|
|
Thom12255 posted:Why would Disney cancel this? More like they're going to force Seth to make it Kingdom Hearts in space. So, which of the Orville crew are Xehanort?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
This show will be cancelled after having it's time slot shifted randomly for months it just to finally fill out the "90's sci fi show revival" dance card
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
M_Sinistrari posted:Is this even a possibility? I thought every time the copyright looks vaguely close to expiring, Disney gets it's lawyers in gear to get the laws rewritten again for them. 2019 was the first year since the mickey mouse protection act that anything entered into the public domain in the United States. A lot of articles I read around the first of the year said something to the effect that Disney may have shifted strategies on IP now that they can just buy all of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 19:42
|
|
|
What a sweet ep. Sure, it was a re-used plot premise, but it was just so pleasant and entertaining. This is the episode I'd show my mum to get her into this show - TNG was probably the last trek she saw. Also, same week the other show had time crystals and guy who's both eyes were poked out by needles. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 19:46
|
|
|
pixaal posted:
You don't have to guess, they've said explicitly as such.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
Mokotow posted:What a sweet ep. Sure, it was a re-used plot premise, but it was just so pleasant and entertaining. This is the episode I'd show my mum to get her into this show - TNG was probably the last trek she saw. Just one eye.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 20:23
|
|
|
OB_Juan posted:So, which of the Orville crew are Xehanort? Bortus got Norted!
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 20:45
|
|
|
I would just like to say i enjoy this a lot more than the black lady tucker carlson space jesus space show thanks for listening
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 21:33
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Bortus got Norted! Nortus
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 21:35
|
|
|
OB_Juan posted:So, which of the Orville crew are Xehanort? trap sprung
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 21:56
|
|
|
Donovan Trip posted:I've seen a few places casually refer to season 3 as a sure thing, does anyone know if that's for real? Neilsen says they're getting 2.5 to 3.3 million live views with another 3 million watching on Hulu/etc, but I can't find official statements on S3. I think that assumption is coming from season 3 being approved for something like $15 million in tax credits, which even though TV production costs have gone up a bunch still seems like it'd be a pretty substantial proportion of the costs to actually produce it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 22:02
|
|
|
8one6 posted:2019 was the first year since the mickey mouse protection act that anything entered into the public domain in the United States. A lot of articles I read around the first of the year said something to the effect that Disney may have shifted strategies on IP now that they can just buy all of it. Mickey Mouse is also trademarked, so that complicates things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 00:08
|
|
|
M_Sinistrari posted:Is this even a possibility? I thought every time the copyright looks vaguely close to expiring, Disney gets it's lawyers in gear to get the laws rewritten again for them. There's two things going against that: 1) congress is so dysfunctional that it would be incapable of passing any bill, much less one like this 2) last time copyright was extended, the courts in part based their decision on the constitutionality on the fact that there were sound reasons for choosing the specific number of years (the US was moving to match EU copyright law), and not achieving infinite-duration copyright (which is obviously unconstitutional) by repeatedly stringing together finite extensions to existing copyrights. An extension passed today would have no such fig leaf and could very well be struck down
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 00:29
|
|
|
What's the reason for the continual long breaks? The UK is now only an episode behind so I dunno if we'll....be ahead of the US in a fortnight or what. I remember that happening with BSG years back and viewing figures plummeting because of US people pirating our broadcast. I did really enjoy this episode and am glad they didn't go down the line of "oh my god how is my photo in her phone?!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 01:04
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:There's two things going against that: What is wrong with infinite-duration copyrights? At least for stuff like art and fictional characters? It seems weird that Disney would just lose control over Mickey Mouse when they've been actively using him for ages. I'm genuinely asking, by the way, I've never really looked into the reasoning behind copyright law.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 01:12
|
|
|
Phenotype posted:What is wrong with infinite-duration copyrights? Legally speaking, the federal government can't pass laws in categories not specifically granted to them by the constitution, and the constitution says quote:To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries; The word "limited" there means that an infinite-duration copyright would clearly not be covered by this clause (though potentially the argument could be made that another clause allows it; I'm not a constitutional scholar). From the perspective of whether infinite-duration copyrights should be allowed, I think the main counterarguments are that --The purpose of copyright law is to encourage artists to produce art by guaranteeing that they are the sole financial beneficiaries of that art. A copyright that continues past he death of the author cannot achieve this purpose --Allowing classic works to enter the public domain inspires new art and enriches the culture. Disney made it's name re-imagining public domain stories, and we all benefited from it--shouldn't people be allowed to reimagine Mickey Mouse in the same way? This gets a bit muddled when the rights owner is a corporation rather than a person, but that also speaks to the first point. In the year 2019, the only beneficiary of Disney continuing to have the rights to Mickey Mouse is the bank account of the Disney Corporation. The copyright lasting this long isn't fulfilling the purpose of encouraging art to be made--which is the only reason why restricting people's freedom of speech in this manner is tolerable in the first place. The law is taking the side of Disney against would-be Mickey Mouse derivative artists for no public benefit. e: to put it another way, copyright law forbids me from publishing my star wars fanfiction in bookstores. This is a limitation of my freedom of speech, and there better be a good reason for it. The constitution's response is "George Lucas would not have pursued a career in moviemaking if he wasn't the financial beneficiary of his art, and this restriction on you is worth it". With Mickey Mouse, that argument doesn't hold water because so much time has passed that there's no way in hell Walt Disney sat down and thought to himself "I'll only pursue a career in animation if the company I found will continue to be the financial beneficiary of my work for decades and decades and decades after my death". cheetah7071 fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Mar 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 01:19
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Bortus got Norted! Step one, Nort a boy
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 01:27
|
|
|
Phenotype posted:What is wrong with infinite-duration copyrights? At least for stuff like art and fictional characters? It seems weird that Disney would just lose control over Mickey Mouse when they've been actively using him for ages. CPG Grey has a good explainer on this. But the short version is that people may have stories they want to tell with characters but can't because infinite copyright keeps characters away from the public.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 01:33
|
|
|
And trademark law restricts marketing, but not completely. Once the Mouse goes public domain, you'll be able to publish that fanfic you've been working on, but marketing it is going to be tricky. But not impossible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 01:48
|
|
|
The title is really bothering me 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 02:08
|
|
|
mllaneza posted:And trademark law restricts marketing, but not completely. Once the Mouse goes public domain, you'll be able to publish that fanfic you've been working on, but marketing it is going to be tricky. But not impossible. A major example of it is the new DC movie that's coming out in a couple of weeks, Shazam!. The character started life named Captain Marvel but due to a lapse in the comic actually being published they lost the trademark (which Marvel quickly scooped up) so DC was left with a character they could use but couldn't name the actual comic book after. Over the past decade plus they've tried rebranding the character a couple of times with the last time looking like it finally stuck.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
Brawnfire posted:The title is really bothering me ATM Machine!
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
Boinks posted:ATM Machine! *Puts in PIN number*
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 02:14
|
|
|
Gromit posted:Here's an appalling image I cobbled together from 4 screenshots with no work done to match the angle changes or get every little edge detail. Yea, that's 2015 perfectly. I didn't notice the copy of 50 Shades of Grey on the table as well. I can't tell what game it is, but it looks like a Xbox 360 game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 02:47
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Yea, that's 2015 perfectly. I didn't notice the copy of 50 Shades of Grey on the table as well. I can't tell what game it is, but it looks like a Xbox 360 game. thats minecraft baby
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 02:50
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:There's two things going against that: The one thing republicans and almost every democrat agree on is that rich people should be able to stay rich for eternity without having to contribute to society, so I don't see why Disney wouldn't be able to pass a copyright extension  This break is bullshit, though. Just give me weekly episodes ffs
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 02:57
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I gotta give those Krill credit for submitting to all her invasive degrading bullshit. Like if anything shows they're serious about peace and good-faith negotiations it's the fact that they didn't just cancel the whole thing at their initial shuttle bay experience. Just watched that episode, sorry for being late to the thread: when they got up to storm out of the room and return to their ship, I was hoping one of the Krill guys would hesitate to leave and just look at Talla and give her this "ugh, man... please don't make me do all of that again next time" look.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 03:22
|
|
|
Boinks posted:Also clearing those songs must have cost a fortune. It's a good thing they got all that product placement money!
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 04:11
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 06:41
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 06:51
|
|
|
Boinks posted:I can't remember the last time I saw someone smoke on a prime time TV show, maybe a Law and Order in the 90s?  You don't want to watch Mad Men if you're trying to give up smoking.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 07:25
|
|
|
Retroblique posted:
I'd extend that to a 'tread cautiously even if you've quit' warning. I was 7-8 months off of cigs and a month and a half or so off of e-cigs with no cravings until my fiance suggested we give Mad Men a try. I was two episodes in before I put on shoes and headed the two blocks down to the 7-11 for a couple packs of smokes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 08:53
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:With Mickey Mouse, that argument doesn't hold water because so much time has passed that there's no way in hell Walt Disney sat down and thought to himself "I'll only pursue a career in animation if the company I found will continue to be the financial beneficiary of my work for decades and decades and decades after my death". Based on what little I know about Walt, I absolutely believe he said that to himself at some point. I have no doubt that Disney will continue to own the copyright on anything and everything they want until they make the decision to give it up, nothing will be taken from them. Nothing can grease the wheels of congress like big business wanting something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 09:28
|
|
|
This is a pretty minor nitpick of an episode that I enjoyed, but did they ever explain why Tuvok was on the Orville with his time capsule? It obviously was found on earth, wouldn't the best facilities for studying it also be on earth?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 09:39
|
|
|
There's probably a planet where the air is naturally archival quality.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 11:23
|
|
|
big black turnout posted:The one thing republicans and almost every democrat agree on is that rich people should be able to stay rich for eternity without having to contribute to society, so I don't see why Disney wouldn't be able to pass a copyright extension Well as I say the UK is one episode behind right now, that Patriot episode was on. So this episode will be on next week. Then I dunno, I assume we'll actually broadcast the next one and we'll be ahead. What the gently caress are these breaks for, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 11:26
|
|
|
big black turnout posted:This break is bullshit, though. Just give me weekly episodes ffs 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 11:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 01:05 |
|
|
Is 26 episodes a year really so much to ask?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 11:42
|
|