It's True: The Jaws Shark Is Public Domain
12 comments
·June 20, 2025karaterobot
jfengel
As I understand it, problem wasn't Universal. It was that the publisher didn't put his name on the copyright page, so the art became public domain under the laws at the time.
That law has been replaced and you now get copyright automatically.
cjcenizal
What a great story. Going from "it's a vagina with teeth, that's bad" to "it's a penis with teeth, that's good" made me chuckle... just sounds so typical of creatives.
Some might point and say sexism, but I think it's consistent with established tropes. There are piles of analogies between sex and aggression (the Latin word for “sheath” is vagina). An image of a penis-like shark attacking a nude woman is another to throw on the pile.
echelon
The creatives of that time were so sex-minded. There were countless references to Freud and Kafka, HR Giger designed monsters after anatomy and fertility. Sex in general seemed to be on the tip of the tongue of so many authors, writers, and directors of that pre-internet era.
Accessible internet probably took the wind out of their sails. Media has become less porny over time, and the younger generations have even expressed an aversion to it.
nocoiner
God, I love pre-1976 copyright. So many formalities and intricacies. I’m kind of amazed that there’s so much from that era that remains in copyright.
finnh
> He went to the Museum of Natural History to study sharks, and he had a model pose across a couple of stools for reference of what someone looks like swimming.
That explains why the swimmer, at least, looks a bit fake.
Reason077
> ”… Kastel realized that there was something fishy about the painting’s copyright situation.”
I see what you did there.
ironicsans
My first draft had a lot more fish puns. I decided they were a distraction so I cut most of them. A few still slipped through the net.
null
bredren
tldr; the famous art from the Jaws movie poster was originally a book cover. When first published it lacked the required attribution of the time to get enforceable copyright.
IIRC, there are some films in public domain for having "failed" to do this as well.
> an artist should be able to enjoy the fruits of his work in his lifetime if he wants to
Not if you're an illustrator doing work for hire. It's not unreasonable or unusual for the company who commissioned the art to own the copyright. It doesn't always work that way, but there's no reason to think Kastel was robbed without us knowing the actual terms of his contract with Universal. I assume he sold the copyright to Universal, and Universal fumbled the copyright after that, but that doesn't mean it reverts back to Kastel.