During the whole Eldred v. Ashcroft saga, Mickey Mouse was implicated because the Sonny Bono Act expanded the copyright term to protect Disney’s copyright on Mickey Mouse, among many other works. This Times article points out that Mickey’s popularity is waning. I still believe that the Eldred decision was improperly decided (I agree with Breyer’s dissent), but I think this article shows a little bit of irony. Disney has worked very hard to extend the copyright of something that has lost value with time. I guess one cannot really generalize from Mickey Mouse though, because there are so many other works that gain value over time.
*****
Finch directed me to the Terry Gross interview with Triumphe the Insult dog. I found it hilarious.
I don’t think you can generalize from Mickey because he’s such a unique case, but I DO think it’s true that, in general, works lose value over time. In fact, doesn’t the income they bring in decrease exponentially? (or is that reverse exponentially?.. the 1/x^n thing :P)