Talk:List of films in the public domain in the United States/2011

Combine tables to one table so the entire list can be sorted by date, studio, genre, etc
If the work was done to put this all in table format, then it makes more sense to then have it all be in a single table that can be sorted by date, studio, genre, etc., rather than only being able to sort within the first letter of the title. The letter links at the top of the page don't seem necessary for most readers who have scroll ability, though to maintain accessibility for readers with blindness maybe the internal letter index links could be put inline with the table rather than breaking it up.-(76.176.110.245 (talk) 06:25, 1 February 2011 (UTC))
 * Agreed. It makes no sense to break up the list into several tables since they are otherwise sortable. They should be combined into a single table. Kaldari (talk) 20:33, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Manos: The Hands of Fate
A recent edit removed Manos from the list, saying that profilms.com holds the rights. It is listed here: http://www.profilms.com/domestic/movies/MANOS-HANDS%20OF%20FATE/index.htm so it is possible that it should not have been on our list. I will ask them to comment on it publically. Jim no.6 (talk) 10:28, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

The list of films
..is problematic since it relies mostly on a single source, Internet Archive, which is a haven of pirates - a very unreliable source for determining IP status. There are a few films which are well known to be in the PD, such as Night of the Living Dead, since they forgot to add a copyright notice, it is easily verify from a number of reliable sources. Most of them though, not so easy to verify, and should probably be removed from the list. The rest of the article though is pretty decent I think, it shouldn't be AfD. Green Cardamom (talk) 20:28, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * This means: I may remove the whole list and then list only Night of the Living Dead and It's a Wonderful Life. Correct? --George Ho (talk) 20:58, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh well, I think we have some responsibility to try and improve it, not just nuke the list. One way is go through the Wikipedia film articles looking for any claims/sources about PD status that might already be on Wikipedia elsewhere. Next, there are two reliable databases maintained by the US Govt as mentioned in the section above How to verify if a film is in the PD: 1) any film published post-1978 and under copyright is easily determined with 100% accuracy (eg. any film in our list post-1978 and not in that database is public domain 100% certain). 2) the National Archives Database, anything listed there is 100% accurate public domain. Beyond that, we would have to start finding individual sources which is more time consuming. I think we should do these simple 3 checks before nuking the list. I'd be happy to work with you if you want to split up the load. Green Cardamom (talk) 22:43, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

The point is to improve it. If there are debates in the media world about whether certain films are public domain or not, then we should acknowledge that within the list, not delete the list outright. Perhaps we should split the list into two sections, videos that are clearly in the public domain and videos that have contested public domain status. Silver seren C 23:07, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, dear. This means: I must either consume time to remove all Archive.org sources in one edit or make multiple revisions that may consume Wikipedia's server data. Then we must retain the list of movies without Archive.org as references, correct? --George Ho (talk) 23:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * George Ho, probably best not to remove the Archive refs until there is something better to replace them with. As I mentioned above there are two very reliable sources from the US Govt this article should be using. Green Cardamom (talk) 00:09, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok I just started with the easy ones, those films published post-1978 - as mentioned above, any work in that period that has a record in the Copyright Office database will be in fact copyright. Of the 5 films in our list, 4 of them are registered copyright. Only one, The Driller Killer, is in the public domain. I've removed the other four, and left notice in the film articles about their copyright status. Green Cardamom (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'm stuck. The only reliable database for checking pre-1978 films are 1) The Card Catalog at the Copyright Office (travel to DC in person and spend a week flipping through cards), or the book series Film Superlist (cost around $1000). I don't see how anyone is going to verify the status of these films for Wikipedia purposes, until someone with access to Film Superlist comes along. The source currently used, Internet Archive, is highly unreliable. Silver, unless you can come up with a reliable source, I don't see how we can keep most of the list. It's unsourced, and very difficult to verify. It's not like a Google search is going to find the answer. There are a few limited reliable sources and they are costly to access. Green Cardamom (talk) 04:33, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * One thing I have to ask first is...does the Internet Archive really count as a copyvio? Because it's linked directly by the Library of Congress here as a main source for such info. Silver  seren C 06:36, 30 December 2011 (UTC)


 * A LoC web link to IA doesn't give blanket public domain status on the entire collection. IA is sort of like a wiki that anyone can edit, like Wikipedia it's not a reliable source. It's a collection of films that the general public using anonymous accounts uploaded with little or no oversight or verification, other than an honor system. There are few mechanisms like on Wikipedia for the community to police itself. IA staff is limited and overworked so they don't manually check uploads. Users can't delete films they have to request deletions, and even then sometimes those requests don't get made. Meanwhile pirates use it as a base to work out of. IA is riddled with copyright films. It also has many PD films. But in the end, it's not a reliable source for determining the copyright status of a film (with some exceptions). Green Cardamom (talk) 16:06, 30 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh, and you can also use good snippet searches, such as this for Film Superlist: Motion Pictures in the U.S. Public Domain, 1940-1949 and search for them individually via snippet, with the acknowledgement that not finding it doesn't mean it isn't public domain, just that the snippet might not be working right or the book may not cover the film. That search right there already shows All This and Rabbit Stew is public domain. Silver  seren C 06:41, 30 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I'll check this out. This is a reliable source and would be enough to keep a film in the list. Green Cardamom (talk) 16:06, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Silver, I started checking these out, but it's impossible to tell what's being said about the film since there is not enough content in the snippet to verify. Green Cardamom (talk) 03:15, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Look at Talk:Storm in a Teacup (film). Talks about reliable sources and original research are becoming privalent to this topic. --George Ho (talk) 00:06, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Elen is correct, however. You need to have reliable sources that are actually cited in the articles in question. Original research isn't going to get us anywhere. Silver  seren C 02:48, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Uruguay Round Agreements Act
Let's not forget Uruguay Round Agreements Act. Any foreign work first published abroad for more than 30 days before the United States release is still copyrighted; for instance, many post-1945 Chinese movies made first in China. They do qualify because they never had official US release and failed to comply with the US laws; there is no need to file for Notice of Intent to Enforce as long as Chinese movies are recognized, and any Chinese movie studio may still file suit for infringements. Also, Hercules (1958 film) is still copyrighted under URAA because it was an Italian movie that had first release in US one year after first release abroad; NIE was filed. --George Ho (talk) 07:16, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * If they never had a US release, then there's no reason to be discussing them in this article, as it is about films released in the US. As for other types of copyright. is. as per your examples, Hercules considered public domain in the US? Because this list is only dealing with that, not whether it is copyrighted in other countries. If it is public domain in the US, then it should be included in this list. Silver  seren C 08:00, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think I must have confused you a lot. I'll rephrase: these Italian Hercules movies are currently listed as PD in the US, but they were foreign films that qualify for URAA. I will eventually move them to "Films no longer in public domain" section. --George Ho (talk) 08:06, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ38b.pdf. ...You have a point. I never said that Chinese films were not released in the US; I said that official release was never made. Possibly, the Chinese films were imported and then released unofficially to the Chinese audience, especially back in the days where television was impossible. Garfield Theatre, for example, used to display Chinese films; there were no copyrights registered because forms were in English and maybe Copyright Office could not accept Chinese language back in those days... I think? They were unofficially released, but no American studio officially released them. --George Ho (talk) 08:21, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Almost forgot, if Chinese works were registered, then they were romanized. For example, http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?Search_Arg=crown+records&Search_Code=NALL&PID=BoFkibMonB5D4noX-bMkcUiM1oD&SEQ=20111230032410&CNT=25&HIST=1. --George Ho (talk) 08:24, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think if they were never "officially" released into the US market, then they shouldn't be included in this list.


 * As for your first part, does the URAA mean they are also copyrighted in the US? Because things can be copyrighted in other countries, but not be considered copyright in the US, making them public domain here, even if they aren't elsewhere. For example, any Japanese film between 1909 and...1952, I believe, are public domain in the US, because we didn't have a copyright agreement with Japan during that time period, due to those pesky world wars. Silver  seren C 09:09, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well... works from Iran are not federally protected for copyrights; Iran is not currently the WTO, UCC, or Berne country at all. I'm not sure what state laws apply for Iranian works, but US Gov does not protect works that are not originated from WTO or Berne country. For Italy, this is the 2003 amendment. Still searching older law. The Hercules movies are still copyrighted in the US under URAA if and when they meet URAA requirements for copyright protection. --George Ho (talk) 09:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, it's something we're going to need to check for each of the entries in this list. I'm sure quite a few of them are PD, but it would be nice to be able to reference that. Silver  seren C 10:08, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Commercial resellers of PD content
What would you think of using commercial resellers as evidence of a films PD status? It would have to be something published like a DVD and not a website download. For example Chilling Classics 50 Movie Pack (1984). The rationale being, the company who put this DVD of 50 films together has done the legal research and is therefore a (fairly) reliable source for determining copyright status, by proxy. Perhaps if it was worded as such in the article, not to be 100% certain but presenting evidence of. Green Cardamom (talk) 17:55, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've decided against this idea for now because I don't believe companies that publish PD content are all reliable sources. Some of them are fly by night, publish and wait for take down notices and disappear before courts can catch up. Maybe there are some established reliable publishers from whose back catalog a list of PD films can be drawn. Green Cardamom (talk) 02:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)