Disney owns the 1992 production of Aladdin so who exactly are they "stealing" from?

wgjordan an hour ago | parent | next [-]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aladdin

The argument, as I understand it is that the "theft" is in quotes because it's not literally copyright infringement, but fair use of an old public-domain folk tale that ends up consuming the latter.

Today, when kids know "Aladdin" they know the copyrighted/trademarked Disney character, not the traditional folk tale- that's the "theft" that happened.

▲

cortesoft 35 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Doesn't this mean that anyone can make a competing Aladdin story, though? Since they don't own the source IP?

	▲	bigfishrunning 30 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It does! but you can't use anything Disney added (the tiger, the talking bird, etc..) and your production values would have to be super high to avoid looking like a store-brand knockoff. It's hard to deny that the Disney version does damage the original story in some way

▲

an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

khuey an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If you subscribe to any concept of the public domain this is surely in it.

▲

altmanaltman 27 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Would most kids around the world even know Aladdin if it wasn't for the Disney copyrighted movie?

	▲	the_af a minute ago \| parent [-]
		Very likely yes. I was very familiar with this story, and other "Arabian" tales, well before Disney made the original animated version. We also had Grimm's fairy tales, which I loved reading, and nowadays am reading to my daughter, to her delight. Yes, with beheadings and child-eating monsters and witches.

▲

inanutshellus an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I assume he's saying Disney owns the 1992 film so the 1999 film is not theft, but he wants it to be because he doesn't like the 1999 film. Thus the quotes.