FieryVulpine FieryVulpine:
Wouldn't other studios fight tooth and nail to extend copyright laws anyway? For example, I don't think AT&T/Warnermedia would want to give up copyright on Looney Tunes, Superman, and Batman. Not that I would terribly mind someone else's take on the Man of Steel or Dark Knight. The current Brian Michael Bendis run had me leave Superman and Action Comics, and oh lord, his Legion of Super-Heroes is awful.
It's not that they want to protect their work, it's that they want it protected
forever when many Constitutions, including the US's, specify
limited. The US even makes other countries follow US law on copyright when they negotiate trade deals, even if those laws change over time or cause the other countries laws to become more strict.
Disney has taken many folk stories; Aladdin, Snow White, Pinocchio, Cinderella, that were 'public domain' and not subject to copyright and effectively privatized them. Sure, you could make a movie based on the traditional Chinese story of Hula Mulan, but Disney's lawyers will destroy anyone who tries even if they are unlikely to win in court.
Since Disney first made "Steam Boat Willie" in 1928 they have fought to make sure that Disney IP will never enter the Public Domain through copyright expiration. Many feel this lack of expiration hurts art in that new ideas can't be based on old because of the threat of the army of lawyers ready to pounce.