The IP Conundrum

Wheel of controversy, spin-spin-spin, which recent controversy’s fit to dive in? 

That’ll work!

I’ve written many pieces on Disney before, both positive and negative. But I’ve steered clear of several topics, as I doubt I would’ve done them justice. However, this one hits home as someone who hopes to one day get his work published. Let’s get started:

In 2012, The Walt Disney Corporation acquired Lucasfilm for roughly $4 billion. With this, Disney came into custody of not only the Star Wars films, but also the expanded canon (or EU). Shortly afterward, Disney did a soft-reboot and declared everything that wasn’t the movies or the then-running TV series non-canon. This angered many fans, but it also raised questions that…I won’t discuss here.

Recently it was revealed that Alan Dean Foster, celebrated EU writer, hasn’t been receiving royalties for his contributions to this EU. This was compounded by his and his wife’s declining health, leading to The Science Fiction Writers of America to take on his case. To quote Foster himself:

“I know this is what gargantuan corporations often do: ignore requests and inquiries hoping the petitioner will simply go away. Or possibly die. But I’m still here, and I am still entitled to what you owe me. Including not to be ignored, just because I’m only one lone writer. How many other writers and artists out there are you similarly ignoring?”

As expected, this whole ordeal was made big by the general public, made more-apparent by The SFWA releasing an unusual image. I don’t blame them: Foster had a contract that existed before Disney’s acquisition of Star Wars and 20th Century Fox. Foster’s contract hadn’t expired, so he was entitled to his dues. Disney not honouring this agreement, therefore, is a breach of contract. It doesn’t matter that The EU’s “not canon”, that should be respected. And it’s not.

What’s worse is that, honestly, it’s not surprising either. Disney’s a corporation. Corporations are, by nature, out for the bottom-line, which is money. That Foster was subtracting from that was concerning. So, naturally, they cut him.

It’s also not surprising when you factor in some of Disney’s corporate decisions historically. This is the company who invented Mickey Mouse when Oswald the Rabbit couldn’t be brought over because of copyright issues. This is the same company who used a public domain story for their first feature-film for that same reason. And this is the same company who fought to have American copyright laws extend the ownership of Mickey Mouse. Essentially, Disney’s draconian behaviour with their IPs is well-documented.

But it begs the question: what if Foster loses his case? Remember, Foster has a progressive and aggressive form of cancer. He might not live to see closure. And even if he goes to court, who’s to say he’ll win? And if he loses, what’ll happen to the royalties of other authors who’ve licensed copyrighted material for tie-ins? 

Part of why this is so upsetting is because this stuff happens all the time: someone licenses a property to make content, only for the owner(s) to turn around and renege on the initial agreement. It’s wrong, but it should surprise no one. Doubly-so with Disney on the reneging end.

So what now? There’s already been a push for Disney to abide by their end of the agreement. There’ve also been several reminders that Mickey Mouse becomes public domain in 2024, and that American Congress should be pressured into not renewing the lease. But I don’t think it’s enough to stop there. I also think that the systems of licensing and copyright need changing, as they’re not currently favourable to small-time creators. To quote myself from an IRD article on copyright:

“…[I]f I wanted to copyright a tune I’d made, under the current rules I’d have 70 years past my death to hold the patent…Additionally, should I have composed that tune with a fellow Infinite Rainy Day writer, the copyright would expire 70 years to the day of that person’s death…[T]hat’s not factoring in a renewed patent from my successor of an additional 67 years, whether or not I end up getting married and my spouse acquires custody of my tune after I die, or if I’d bought the rights to my tune from another licensor and modified it for my own needs…”

You can see why this’d be frustrating, right? I haven’t even mentioned licensing laws! Regardless, this is what’s at stake if Disney gets their way. And they shouldn’t. Because it sets a bad precedent for small-time writers looking to make a name through licensed fiction. 

It also, as a side-note, really sucks for Foster. This is a sick man who’s also looking after a sick wife. He doesn’t know how much longer he has. Even with The SFWA backing him, it might not be enough. He could lose this case, and that’d be awful.

I’d be less-invested if I didn’t see the impact these cases have on small-time creators constantly. But I do. I see it with fiction all the time. And I see it on YouTube and Twitch with DMCA claims and takedown notices, even when they have no legal basis. It’s a problem for many people. And it shouldn’t be this difficult to get corporations to relent.

Ultimately, a choice needs to be made: does Disney honour a previously-established agreement with a beloved author, or do they renege and look bad in the eyes of the public? They’ve made many bad choices in the last few years, so I doubt they’d want another headache. Especially since they care about their reputation.

I hope they come to their senses and do what’s right. It’d mean losing a little money, but so what? They can afford it, even with COVID making matters difficult right now. Besides, Foster’s dying. And his wife’s sick. Surely they don’t want this kind of PR nightmare, do they? James Gunn being fired was already bad enough!