King Kong & Copyright
Seems like every few weks somebody brings up King Kong, and the discussion degenerates into nearly endless arguments based on something somebody read on the Internet vs something else somebody read on the internet.
If you want to get the real story, the full text of *Universal v RKO* is available on the Internet Archive, here: https://archive.org/details/1981-01-05-universal-v.-rko-documents/1981-01-05%20Universal%20v.%20RKO%20Documents/mode/1 .
Includes backstory, transcripts, a witness being late for court because he needed to move his car, and most importantly, the rulings for all the claims and counter-claims relevent to the question.
The court is unambiguous: The novel and magazine serialization are public domain. The court explains in detail *why* this is so, and summarily dismisses arguments against it, even voiding a renewal certificate issued to Wallace's heir.
Further, the court specifically states--without any wiggle room--that Universal is entitled to make a film based on the book.
It's pretty much a comprehensive win for the public domain.
It's long, but worth reading.