Talk:The Scarlet Pimpernel (1934 film)

Plot
I am willing to work on the plot for this movie (it is one of my top 10 favs). Maybe I can work on it this upcoming weekend (5/4/08). I have made very few changes here, but am willing to work on it. There will be no references, and I will have a better plot summery than the 1982 version of the film.

Can't we boost the film to medium priority at least? :-)

Alan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Afrederi (talk • contribs) 01:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Copyright status
I have deleted the links to the illicit hosting of this British film on Internet Archive et al. Co-writer S. N. Behrman did not die until 1973, so UK copyright subsists until the end of 2043. As a non-US film still under copyright in its country of origin on 1 January 1996, it is protected in the US for 95 years after publication, so to the end of 2029. Nick Cooper (talk) 22:23, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I know that those topics can be hairy, but for what it's worth I'll quote here this IMDB trivia:
 * The failure of the original copyright holder to renew the film's copyright resulted in it falling into public domain, meaning that virtually anyone could duplicate and sell a VHS/DVD copy of the film. Therefore, many of the versions of this film available on the market are either severely (and usually badly) edited and/or of extremely poor quality, having been duped from second- or third-generation (or more) copies of the film.


 * Besides, multiple copies are on Youtube.com, including this one that explicitly states Public Domain. Wouldn't it be strange that both Alphabet Inc. and Amazon.com, Inc. overlook a copyright infrigement ?


 * Finally, this one copy on Archive.org does specify Public Domain. I don't know exactly how scrupulous they are about copyright there, but this being a highly visible institution, I'd be surprised that they'd take chances. This long list of public domain movies must have been scrutinized and again by many a legal department.


 * Hence, I would motion that we re-instate the archive.org link and that, with proper sourcing, the alledged loss of copyright be mentioned in this article.


 * Noliscient (talk) 00:55, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Shan't we diambiguate ?
Seeing that there exist many works with this same title, shouldn't this article wear a hat of disambiguation ? Noliscient (talk) 23:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)