- +

Author Topic: Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944  (Read 5682 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BobS

  • Banned
  • DCM Member
  • Posts: 111
  • Karma: 3
  • public enemy #1
Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944
« on: July 15, 2010, 01:26:42 PM »
Is Swappers Quarterly (Bernard Baily) Cisco Kid #1 1944 OK to upload?
Is it here already?
Bob
Public Enemy #1

Digital Comic Museum

Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944
« on: July 15, 2010, 01:26:42 PM »

Offline Yoc

  • S T A F F
  • Administrators
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15115
  • Karma: 58
  • 14 Years Strong!
Re: Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944
« Reply #1 on: July 15, 2010, 01:53:04 PM »
I believe it's already on the site Bob -
http://tinyurl.com/25br7ug

Check and see if it's the same as yours.

Offline Yoc

  • S T A F F
  • Administrators
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15115
  • Karma: 58
  • 14 Years Strong!
Re: Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944
« Reply #2 on: July 16, 2010, 12:09:05 PM »
After some thought we've decided the book and character's PD status are questionable and removed them from the site.
But thanks for your offer Bob.

Offline JVJ (RIP)

  • VIP Uploaders
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1052
  • Karma: 58
  • paix
    • ImageS Magazine
Re: Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944
« Reply #3 on: July 16, 2010, 01:25:09 PM »
I'm really curious as to WHY this book should be removed. It has NOTHING to do with anything that is copyright or non-PD. Please share your thought processes with me. Thanks.

Peace, Jim (|:{>
Peace, Jim (|:{>

JVJ Publishing and VW inc.

Offline Yoc

  • S T A F F
  • Administrators
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15115
  • Karma: 58
  • 14 Years Strong!
Re: Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944
« Reply #4 on: July 16, 2010, 01:42:19 PM »
Well Jim, when checking the history of the character on the Copyright site you see the radio show scripts were renewed.
If we can't positively say the comics were not based on those copyrighted radio shows then we can't host them.  These licenced characters are very hard to be sure they are PD or not.

Feel free to correct me here.

Offline narfstar

  • VIP Uploaders
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1675
  • Karma: 74
Re: Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944
« Reply #5 on: July 24, 2010, 11:47:21 AM »
From my understanding the original book was unauthorized. Kinda of a fuzzy area since the book itself is not copyright. Is it public domain or does it belong to the Cisco Kid copyright holder?

Offline Yoc

  • S T A F F
  • Administrators
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15115
  • Karma: 58
  • 14 Years Strong!
Re: Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944
« Reply #6 on: July 24, 2010, 12:52:13 PM »
If one can't be certain it isn't based on a then current radio show one can't be sure it's safe.
This is just a case of DCM playing it safe and not sharing it.

Offline John C

  • Administrators
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1316
  • Karma: 3
    • John's Blog
Re: Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944
« Reply #7 on: July 24, 2010, 01:05:09 PM »
To (hopefully quickly) clarify the deal, if the book isn't copyrighted, then the book is in the public domain, no question.

However...if the book is derived (directly, I mean, like outright copying or adaptation) from a copyrighted work, then the original author would have grounds to prevent distribution.  It also couldn't be used by anybody for adaptation, since it'd be adapting the ORIGINAL material.

As I interpret things, it's sort of like an anthology.  Individual elements (stories, specifically) may have individual copyrights, even though the collection is in the public domain, and that single copyright can't be violated just because someone other than the owner messed up.  But in this case, we don't know what those copyrights might be to research them.

(That's not to say "no," just showing where the complexity is.  Other thoughts, as always, would be appreciated.)

Offline JVJ (RIP)

  • VIP Uploaders
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1052
  • Karma: 58
  • paix
    • ImageS Magazine
Re: Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944
« Reply #8 on: July 24, 2010, 04:34:22 PM »
If one can't be certain it isn't based on a then current radio show one can't be sure it's safe.
This is just a case of DCM playing it safe and not sharing it.
I think the whole "might be an adaptation of a radio play" is an over the top interpretation of copyright. If the book was not renewed and there is zero indication that anyone challenged it in 1944 as an infringement of the radio show, then such a strict denial of PD is highly speculative and seems totally imaginary to me. Are you going to stop hosting Wild Bill Hickok & Jingles? After all, ANY of those stories MIGHT be based on an episode of the TV show. I appreciate and applaud the concern for PD, but carrying things to such extremes seems more limiting than the law demands. The "possibles" and "maybes" and "could bes" are endless once you give in to them. If someone complains, by all means take them down, but apriori self-censorship on the grounds of an imagined "potential" conflict is, IMHO, ridiculous.

my 2ยข

(|:{>
Peace, Jim (|:{>

JVJ Publishing and VW inc.

Offline RJ Bowman

  • DCM Member
  • Posts: 30
  • Karma: 0
Re: Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944
« Reply #9 on: July 30, 2010, 08:45:37 PM »
This is a funny case. The Cisco Kid first appeared in an O'Henry story that is safely in the public domain, but the familiar mass-media character was fleshed out by radio writers and given a history that was never described by O'Henry. A shady legal area, and any legal case might just be won by the party with the deepest pockets. Have there been any cases in regard to this character?

Offline narfstar

  • VIP Uploaders
  • DCM Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1675
  • Karma: 74
Re: Swappers Quarterly - Cisco Kid #1 - 1944
« Reply #10 on: July 30, 2010, 10:24:58 PM »
Good point RJ. It would seem very safe then to carry Cisco Kid #1. Several Cisco Kid TV episodes are showing up on pd sites. These sites may not closely check pd status but they also do not seem to be having any problems. The lack of commercial value of probably has a lot to do with it.