The artwork in the Tower of Terror episode from 'Behind the Attraction' on Disney+ was stolen from YouTube creator Art of Engineering

[mikeymouse]

Id like to think i would feel honored if they used my material for promotion. IDK

 

[JoeCamel]

Id like to think i would feel honored if they used my material for promotion. IDK

I'd feel honored but they are profiting from my work so I gotta get paid

 

[lazyboy97o]

Id like to think i would feel honored if they used my material for promotion. IDK

It’s not promotion, he wasn’t credited.

 

[Dead2009]

You peeps are bothered by this, meanwhile Olivia Rodrigo can steal whatever she wants to make her music and she is getting to replace Aerosmith? That’s ridiculous!

Its because shes.....popular?

 

[matt9112]

Its because shes.....popular?

Nah just more merch! Whatever moves merch.

 

[Mickey5150]

I'd feel honored but they are profiting from my work so I gotta get paid

But aren't you profiting from their work since they created the Tower of Terror?

 

[Kirby86]

I have a feeling whoever was in charge of the Tower of Terror episode just looked up Tower of Terror blueprints online and saw this image and said looks legitimate so took it. Something similar happened with The Last of Us game with a subway map.

 

[Coaster Lover]

I am by no means an expert in copyright law, but it seems like 17 U.S. Code § 102(8) might apply here. If I understand the law correctly, just the image of ToT may be protected since it was built after 1990. Since the design and look of the building is protected, I don't believe any image of the building (and I believe that would apply to artistic representation of the building) cannot be copyright protected. If true, this would mean that Disney could take any image of the Tower to use how they wanted without fear of repercussion from the originator of the image because the person who generated the image has no copyright protection because Disney has protection on the Tower itself. Is it morally right if Disney? No... but are they protected legally? Seems they may be...

Again, this is just my interpretation of the law (hopefully someone better versed on copyright law can weigh in).

 

[Ayla]

I am by no means an expert in copyright law, but it seems like 17 U.S. Code § 102(8) might apply here. If I understand the law correctly, just the image of ToT may be protected since it was built after 1990. Since the design and look of the building is protected, I don't believe any image of the building (and I believe that would apply to artistic representation of the building) cannot be copyright protected. If true, this would mean that Disney could take any image of the Tower to use how they wanted without fear of repercussion from the originator of the image because the person who generated the image has no copyright protection because Disney has protection on the Tower itself. Is it morally right if Disney? No... but are they protected legally? Seems they may be...

Again, this is just my interpretation of the law (hopefully someone better versed on copyright law can weigh in).

Someone better versed already covered it in the twitter thread.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Someone better versed already covered it in the twitter thread.

Can you tell what they said? (Sorry...I'm tired and don't have the energy to read through a ton of comments...)

 

[muddyrivers]

But aren't you profiting from their work since they created the Tower of Terror?

That's like saying you can't sell a painting of a building since someone else created it so you are profiting off of them.

 

[Mickey5150]

That's like saying you can't sell a painting of a building since someone else created it so you are profiting off of them.

Depending on the building, you can't.

 

[peter11435]

That's like saying you can't sell a painting of a building since someone else created it so you are profiting off of them.

Actually, I’m some cases you can’t

 

[JoeCamel]

But aren't you profiting from their work since they created the Tower of Terror?

I think said in jest but one is fair use and the other is not

 

[nickys]

But aren't you profiting from their work since they created the Tower of Terror?

How was Martin profiting from them using his artwork, without crediting him for it?

 

[TYOTimer]

The thing people don’t realize is that Disney has a track record of doing this. A lot of their merchandise comes from ideas originally put on Etsy & Redbubble.

I’m just glad there’s a creator (other than Martin) who’s actually taking Disney head on with this

 

[mikejs78]

The thing people don’t realize is that Disney has a track record of doing this. A lot of their merchandise comes from ideas originally put on Etsy & Redbubble.

I’m just glad there’s a creator (other than Martin) who’s actually taking Disney head on with this

In the case of Etsy ideas, the creators there have absolutely no right to sell and profit off of Disney IP. Disney kind of turns a blind eye to it, but then appropriates some of the ideas. I think that's reasonable and far preferable to Disney going after Etsy sellers for copyright infringement (which would be Disney's absolute legal right). Same applies here. Disney could have gone after the YouTube creator for violating copyright. They didn't, but then used his idea.

Similar to how if you use copyrighted material in a YouTube video, it can be copyright claimed and a portion of the ad revenue then goes to the original copyright holder.

 

[WondersOfLife]

Legalities are too messy. I'd just show off that my artwork was used in the episode, credit or not. I'd use it for references on job applications and other sorts of things.

 

[Joffrey]

You peeps are bothered by this, meanwhile Olivia Rodrigo can steal whatever she wants to make her music and she is getting to replace Aerosmith? That’s ridiculous!

"For happy life, steal from internet."
- Confucius (probably)

 

[SpoiledBlueMilk]

It’s not promotion, he wasn’t credited.

Yep - it's straight up theft.