Talk:The Last Man on Earth (1964 film)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Film: Italian / American This article is supported by the Italian cinema task force. This article is supported by the American cinema task force. Horror Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Science Fiction Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Thanks for the spoiler guys. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shirokuma1 (talk • contribs) 14:16, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The plot summary here is totally a word for word copy of I Am Legend or the other way around. In either case, it might be appropriate to write something new. 24.160.213.138 (talk) 03:32, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i agree. the sypnosis is the exact same as the I Am Legend book sypnosis, lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.219.179.186 (talk) 03:38, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can we have a reference as to this claim? I don't see how something of this date can easily just "fall" into the public domain. If the copyright holders are still living don't they have to state explicitly that they're putting something into the public domain? Adytum72a (talk) 13:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

for a reference check the repository at "archive.org". if it is online, it is in the public domain. these guys are pretty sure not to violate any law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.180.124.245 (talk) 09:22, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a totally laughable attempt at justification. There's a huge amount of material on IA that is not and never has been PD, so presence on that platform cannot in any way be said to be proof of PD status. In fact, looking into the issue, I don't see how the claims of PD status can be justified. The film was released (i.e. "published" for copyright purposes) in 1964, meaning the initial 28 year US copyright would not have been due for renewal until 1992, so the claims of it falling into the public domain in "the 1980s" are immediately suspect. However, for works published in 1964 or later, the need for renewal was dropped, so the film is actually copyrighted for 95 years after publication, i.e. to the end of 2059. See the authoritative Cornell Copyright Chart.[1] Nick Cooper (talk) 14:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]