News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

[LAKid53]

Even yelling fire in a crowded fire isn’t actually illegal. It was an example given as part of the establishment of the “clear and present danger” doctrine that was replaced over 50 years ago.

Precisely.

Schenck v US, 1919

 

[mkt]

The legislation doesn't target Disney specifically, first of all.

You're right.

So what are your thoughts on legislators going on record clearly saying in plain English that this legislation is because of what Disney said and did?

Second of all, revocation of a special privilege is not punishment. It's the way things ought to always be.

Couldn't agree more. So why rush this and do it in the most sloppy way possible, and ultimately increasing taxes for local residents?

 

[jrhwdw]

…I’m just gonna back away from this “ticking package”….slowly…

Sorry I Commented then!!!!!!!!

 

[LAKid53]

I know they are - I've been texting with one.

I'm avoiding downtown like the plague right now. They like to patronize my Publix.

 

[Joel]

I have been reading along for updates on this debacle. This situation got so ugly so fast and it’s hard to see a positive ending to this for anyone.

In terms of the copyright issue being used to punish Disney, it is not a matter of what federal legislators do to Disney, it’s if they choose not to do anything. The Steamboat Willie iteration of Mickey’s copyright should have expired more than once already, but Disney repeatedly lobbied politicians to write new legislation or extend legislation allowing them (and other creatives) to retain copyrights longer. The politicians on both sides went along with it.

Steamboat Willie Mickey’s copyright expires in less than two years, and either 1998’s Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (which amended the previous copyright law pertaining to Mickey) has to be changed again in some way or an entirely new law has to be passed for Disney to retain that copyright.

If Congress does absolutely nothing and says “Nope, sorry, not helping you out again,” Disney loses the copyright, but retains the copyright to later iterations of Mickey (presumably including versions like Sorcerer Mickey) until their time is also up. Snow White will face the same problem next decade. I somehow doubt Chapek even thought of any of this.

This should have happened a long time ago regardless. The Founders got the copyright issue right pretty much from the start. Twenty eight years of protection is more than enough. After that, art belongs in the public domain.

 

[MisterPenguin]

The legislation doesn't target Disney specifically, first of all.

Second of all, revocation of a special privilege is not punishment. It's the way things ought to always be.

The law seeks to dissolve all special districts that were made before a certain year.

Guess what year that is?

The year after Reedy Creek was formed.

It was obvious it was targeted at Disney. The governor's and legislators' own pronouncements made that abundantly clear.

Now, just because the bill doesn't mention Disney and Reedy Creek by name, doesn't mean it's fair and neutral. Under judicial review, the obvious intent of the legislators can and have been taken under consideration.

This happened with the several attempts of the Trump administration to ban Muslim immigration by writing supposedly neutral guidelines that, in the end, affected almost exclusively Muslims. The courts called him out on that by using his own words as to what his intent was, and the travel restrictions were struck down several times.

Now, I don't know if such specific and malicious intent is enough to strike down a Dissolution decree, but if there's any law or right in which malicious intent is germane, then the courts have the legislators' own speech to prove that, and the neutral language of the bill is irrelevant.

 

[Ghost93]

As much as I despise DeSantis, I actually think Steamboat Willie going into Public Domain is good, actually. As long as Disney has trademarks on Mickey Mouse, I believe that the film Steamboat Willie would be free to watch and distribute, but people would not be allowed to make their own art with the Steamboat Willie version of Mickey. Which seems fair. In 2024, animation fans and history buffs will get unlimited access to a 95-year-old historical short film, but the overall image of Mickey Mouse will be protected.

Same goes for Snow White. In 2032, I think the film will be freely available everywhere, but the Disney version of the character will not be able to be repurposed if Disney trademarks her.

Films with characters that Disney has no use for trademarking — like Song of the South or the wartime propaganda material — may be another matter.

I also think there's a ton of great non-Disney Black and White movies from the 20s and 30s that are difficult to access in the streaming era. Having them available for free on YouTube might give them a new life. 95 years is a long enough time for a copyright to last on a particular film.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

You're right.

So what are your thoughts on legislators going on record clearly saying in plain English that this legislation is because of what Disney said and did?

They should be more tactful.

Couldn't agree more. So why rush this and do it in the most sloppy way possible, and ultimately increasing taxes for local residents?

To own the libs, obviously.

I'm not going to cry about good policy being passed for cynical political reasons. I'll just take the W and go home.

 

[mkt]

I'm avoiding downtown like the plague right now. They like to patronize my Publix.

I don't blame you.

Disney's lobbyists are... a special breed.

 

[Lord Starwalker]

We are about to see Disney get on its knees. This is probably the first of several big moves by our Florida Governor, Ron DeSantis. The sweetheart tax break deals will be on the table next.

"You poke the bear... You get the claws!" If for some reason Disney CEO, Bob Chapek did not perceive DeSantis as a bear... that's on him.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

The law seeks to dissolve all special districts that were made before a certain year.

Guess what year that is?

The year after Reedy Creek was formed.

The year before the Florida Constitution was ratified. It's defensible for a bona fide reason.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Ignoring current legal precedent for a second, I feel fairly safe in asserting that the First Amendment was not written with the suddenly sacrosanct rights and interests of The Walt Disney Company in mind.

…prior to 1970…you are correct. Since? Companies have been granted “free speech” in court rulings.

Most of the law is case law…not what Madison and Hamilton wrote down while they drank grog

 

[mkt]

They should be more tactful.

That might be too much to ask of our far-right state government.

To own the libs, obviously.

Quoted because truth.

I'm not going to cry about good policy being passed for cynical political reasons. I'll just take the W and go home.

I am. This is a pyrrhic victory.

Makes me glad I didn't move to Orlando last year, so I don't get dinged for an extra $2200.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Now, I don't know if such specific and malicious intent is enough to strike down a Dissolution decree, but if there's any law or right in which malicious intent is germane, then the courts have the legislators' own speech to prove that, and the neutral language of the bill is irrelevant.

I'm not even sure Disney would have standing. Disney IS NOT the Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Reedy Creek Improvement District is not Disney.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

We are about to see Disney get on its knees. This is probably the first of several big moves by our Florida Governor, Ron DeSantis. The sweetheart tax break deals will be on the table next.

"You poke the bear... You get the claws!" If for some reason Disney CEO, Bob Chapek did not perceive DeSantis as a bear... that's on him.

So you’re gonna be “that guy” here, huh?

I’ll set the over/under at 5 more posts

 

[mkt]

Precisely.

Schenck v US, 1919

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Makes me glad I didn't move to Orlando last year, so I don't get dinged for an extra $2200.

Nobody is going to get dinged for anything.

Orange County will now pay the bills for these services, but now Disney is paying taxes to Orange County. It all comes out in the wash from a financial perspective. The main impact is that Disney will have some extra red tape to deal with on permits and such.

 

[SirLink]

What words were said - what was libelous? What was slanderous?

Why then pursue this law, rather than civil action against those who said it?

One of the points the speaker made was around the state would remove LGBTIQA+++++++ and put them into care.

Civil action would of taken too long ... I am surprised they haven't introduced a state income tax exclusively for Disney employees though

 

[lazyboy97o]

As much as I despise DeSantis, I actually think Steamboat Willie going into Public Domain is good, actually. As long as Disney has trademarks on Mickey Mouse, I believe that the film Steamboat Willie would be free to watch and distribute, but people would not be allowed to make their own art with the Steamboat Willie version of Mickey. Which seems fair. In 2024, animation fans and history buffs will get unlimited access to a 95-year-old historical short film, but the overall image of Mickey Mouse will be protected.

Same goes for Snow White. In 2032, I think the film will be freely available everywhere, but the Disney version of the character will not be able to be repurposed if Disney trademarks her.

Films with characters that Disney has no use for trademarking — like Song of the South or the wartime propaganda material — may be another matter.

I also think there's a ton of great non-Disney Black and White movies from the 20s and 30s that are difficult to access in the streaming era. Having them available for free on YouTube might give them a new life. 95 years is a long enough time for a copyright to last on a particular film.

DeSantis has absolutely nothing to do with US copyright law.

 

[LAKid53]

Just going to toss out..... Disney has always been political. You might not care for this particular stance (fine), but to pretend like Disney has not been involved in issues and politics since its founding is just completely ahistorical.

Just about every major corporation in Florida is. To think otherwise is denying reality. FPL literally wrote the legislation that impacts residential solar generation. And was a main funder of a recent constitutional amendment.

Then there's Big Sugar's efforts to impede restoration of the Everglades.