-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Bloggers and Podcasters need to be controlled
- Thread starter RSoxNo1
- Start date
Bairstow
Well-Known Member
That's a very weak defense for a potential copyright defendant, especially after 1989 when the Berne Convention was implemented in the US. Also, the bad press Disney earned through the day care incident has caused them to reevaulate their strategy in this regard.
One thing to consider is that we're comparing two very different breeds of copyright offenders here. Bloggers and podcasters, being ostensibly journalists, have a number of fair use defenses to present if Disney were to allege copyright violations that someone wishing to purchase a for-profit coffee table biography would not. That's not to mention the considerable cost and difficulty Disney, or anyone, has of enforcing complete copyright control on the internet. The laws are there, but the scope of policing they would have to do isn't worth the effort, particularly when bloggers and podcasters, even the critical ones, are part of a fan community Disney really would rather not confront as adversaries.
Lee
Adventurer
Should be escorted off property and be issued a cease and desist order.
Wonder why that isn't happening...
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
We're talking about the folks who SELL stuff. I'm well aware that broadcasts are covered under fair use laws and I'm not challenging that. I'm challenging stuff like this...
and this..
while this...
gets shafted.
Tigger1988
Well-Known Member
People have explained why the book is getting "shafted". Amid has no desire to let Disney change the book's details, therefore Disney has no desire to give Amid rights to their copyrighted material. You're comparing apples to oranges.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
I know why the book's getting shafted, that's not why I brought it up.
What I find funny is they used to have a strict hands off policy in regards to authors using Disney owned images. As long as the individual has a high level of credibility in their field, Disney would allow them to peruse the archive for the images they needed (In Amid's case, stuff that Ward either drew or supervised) and to license those images without approving the content of the book. The background check and approval at the beginning was all Disney chose to control and it worked pretty well for years.
But today any Lou, Dick, or Stanely can use Disney IP and sell it. That's the issue @Tigger1988, that someone who has a great deal of credibility, enough credibility to be allowed to write Pixar's 25 year retrospective artbook and respected by many important folks in Emeryville, the Hat Building, and other animation studios can't license Disney owned images to put in the book that they will sell with the mouse getting a chunk of every sale. Why does an individual who has no established credibility or skill have the ability to sell Disney IP as if it were his own (read tours, live shows in the park, DVDs for sale) get off? If I recall correctly, spirit posted in this thread a bit of info he gleamed from a higher up a Disney that said the following
They let random folks who sell Disney IP without renumeration get away with it while folks with a great deal of credibility, Amidi and Chronicle(You know... the folks that publish ALL OF DISNEY AND PIXAR'S ARTBOOKS) get left on the sidelines.
What I find funny is they used to have a strict hands off policy in regards to authors using Disney owned images. As long as the individual has a high level of credibility in their field, Disney would allow them to peruse the archive for the images they needed (In Amid's case, stuff that Ward either drew or supervised) and to license those images without approving the content of the book. The background check and approval at the beginning was all Disney chose to control and it worked pretty well for years.
But today any Lou, Dick, or Stanely can use Disney IP and sell it. That's the issue @Tigger1988, that someone who has a great deal of credibility, enough credibility to be allowed to write Pixar's 25 year retrospective artbook and respected by many important folks in Emeryville, the Hat Building, and other animation studios can't license Disney owned images to put in the book that they will sell with the mouse getting a chunk of every sale. Why does an individual who has no established credibility or skill have the ability to sell Disney IP as if it were his own (read tours, live shows in the park, DVDs for sale) get off? If I recall correctly, spirit posted in this thread a bit of info he gleamed from a higher up a Disney that said the following
They let random folks who sell Disney IP without renumeration get away with it while folks with a great deal of credibility, Amidi and Chronicle(You know... the folks that publish ALL OF DISNEY AND PIXAR'S ARTBOOKS) get left on the sidelines.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Know what's jacked??? That a o-town Kling-on is getting better treatment than one of the 9 old men!!
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
Lee
Adventurer
Surprising. Then you don't know the ones I assumed you did.
Cruises on the new ships, trips out to Aluani, stays at the Animation hotel, free accommodations during press events (even for locals...), etc.
Happens all the time.
Lee
Adventurer
Yep.
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
I'm not suggesting it doesnt happen. Part of it is a changing paradigm of the new media in this country; traditional travel outlets are changing as newspapers & mags are going out of business. Travel people have always been comped.
What I want to see is the people who take these things be honest about it.
Lee
Adventurer
Of course. That's a huge part of the issue here.
I want to see them be honest about it and also earn it. If your site or blog or tweets don't reach more than a few hundred people per day...GTFOff the gravy train.
And, I want to see Disney keep the playing field level. If Lou can interview guests in the MK for his show, let everyone do it. Especially real news outlets. If WESH (for example) can't operate in the parks, then nobody should.
PhotoDave219
Well-Known Member
Uh.... in the traditional media, that doesn't happen either. I've had moments of losing my mind at a PR person because another media outlet got the exclusive. It was sour grapes on my part, but i was sure to express my opinion at the moment....
Generally, the bigger fish get the bigger attention. Lou gets numbers; he has readers and supporters worldwide. I hate to say it but its better than what WESH can do. The wire services and editors I work with, they DO NOT GIVE A DAMM about whatever Disney is doing. Niche travel blogs, magazines, industry people DO.
Look at it from Disney's POV: You have to reach the largest audience possible. WESH only reaches the Orlando market.
Plus real journalists might notice something else while they are there.
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
I don't know, but I find the whole concept to be largely useless (yes, like Twitter). ... Someone remarked to me earlier today that one of the Lifestylers was recording their 2012 Year in Review Podcast and it was five or six hours long. All I could think is 'what type of person thinks that much happened that's worthy of that amount of time -- I could do a 30 minute wrap up of WDW and all the O-Town parks quite easily and not miss anything?' and 'who will actually listen to that?' ... Do they truly think they'll get the time back when they get to the Pearly Gates (assuming of course you believe it that)?
That is so, so true. It's all about cliques and who likes whom and who hates whom and who is getting what from Disney. It is so high school-ish ...well, not mine, we acted more mature as teens than these folks act.
The only passion they have is for their own bottom lines. Do they like Disney? Sure. But if another company offered them the chance to be a paid online BRAND ADVOCATE, they'd drop the Mouse tomorrow
Now that was....interesting.....
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
Exactly, Lee. ... Why in the world would those of us with lives have sour grapes, or worse -- vendettas -- for people who are living lives that we would NEVER want? I can't think of a sadder existence than living in theme parks yet not really being there to enjoy yourself or being paid (MEANING as a Disney CM) for your time, but because you have to be the first blogger to get a picture when the walls for Storybook Circus come down.
I sure don't want or need what the bloggers/podcasters/lifestyle whores are getting. My life has so much more meaning than that and I have experienced and will continue to things that these people couldn't dream of. They need five minutes with Chris Beatty or Phil Holmes? Great. I'll pass.
I'm just not happy about Disney having paid brand ADVOCATES in social media that are blatantly shilling the product and lying about it (no, Lou, Tom, Ricky etc, but WDW has most definitely been better than it is now ... when it comes to basic upkeep and show quality, I'd argue that WDW has never been worse!) and their roles in it. And I have no intention of slowing my criticism down as the calendar changes from 2012 to 2013.
Happy New Year!
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
Note: This video may result in utter repulsion and/or projectile vomiting.
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
Agreed.
But with this 'new media' there are no rules and it's like the Wild West when it comes to how WDW Co is dealing with bloggers/podcaster/lifestyle whores. ... People aren't being given the whole story by any stretch. Has Lou talked about the infrastructure issues at WDW? Has Tom written/podcasted about all the SQS issues at WDW? Has anyone taken photos of all the netting going up all over WDW because they're afraid pieces of structure are going to fall on guests/cast?
I'm a shareholder (and not of the one or two share variety). I give a damn about one thing: the truth.