Disney revoking AP's if you resell merch

[imthewalrus79]

We're going to have to agree to disagree, I've even provided case law but your mind isn't going to change. The only unsettled aspect is whether Disney can legally revoke someone's access (pass) because they have executed their right to resell.

See also Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc., Dr. Miles Medical Company v. John D. Park & Sons, Co., might even be something in U.S. v. Colgate & Co...

What's next, Disney revokes someone's access because someone wrote a bad review? What if Disney decided that they didn't like persons who voted a certain way, can they ban them too? Would you be OK with that? It's a slippery slope.

Your argument that no-one shall be provided extra benefits is nonsense, and grossly anti-capitalist.

I've worked for a few retail companies over the years. One of the benefits of working at these companies was getting a discount on merchandise we purchased there. The catch was, the merchandise had to be for us or our immediate family. If we bought something for friends or turned around and sold it online, we could be punished from losing our right to the discount all the way up to termination.

What Disney is doing here is the same thing. As a benefit of purchasing their AP, they are giving users a discount on merchandise. But, as outlined in their terms, they are not allowing you to use that discount to purchase items to turn around and sell online. Disney isn't telling them they can't resell at all. They just can't use the discount to buy those items. If they do, per Disney's terms, they can terminate their AP. As a private business, they have that right. So, these people have every right to buy and AP and buy as many of a limited item as they want; Disney just says they can't use their AP discount to do it. I see nothing anti-capitalist about it. I see it as Disney saying we're willing to give you a 20% discount because you're buying an expensive AP pass so that you can buy souvenirs for yourself, your family and your friends. All we ask is that you don't use that discount to turn around and sell those items that you just purchased using that discount, usually at a big mark up.

 

[RustySpork]

I've worked for a few retail companies over the years. One of the benefits of working at these companies was getting a discount on merchandise we purchased there. The catch was, the merchandise had to be for us or our immediate family. If we bought something for friends or turned around and sold it online, we could be punished from losing our right to the discount all the way up to termination.

What Disney is doing here is the same thing. As a benefit of purchasing their AP, they are giving users a discount on merchandise. But, as outlined in their terms, they are not allowing you to use that discount to purchase items to turn around and sell online. Disney isn't telling them they can't resell at all. They just can't use the discount to buy those items. If they do, per Disney's terms, they can terminate their AP. As a private business, they have that right. So, these people have every right to buy and AP and buy as many of a limited item as they want; Disney just says they can't use their AP discount to do it. I see nothing anti-capitalist about it. I see it as Disney saying we're willing to give you a 20% discount because you're buying an expensive AP pass so that you can buy souvenirs for yourself, your family and your friends. All we ask is that you don't use that discount to turn around and sell those items that you just purchased using that discount, usually at a big mark up.

There's one significant difference here, when you are employed by a merchant you represent that merchant even when you are not at work. When you purchase something with an employee discount and resell it you are ripping off your employer.

When you're a customer of a merchant and you resell something you have legally purchased from that merchant.. even at a discounted price, the merchant loses the right to tell you what you can and cannot do with the item you've purchased once the sale is complete unless it is a non-physical intellectual property like a software. I mentioned Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. because while the ruling was related to copyright, the Supreme Court makes clear that if you own it you have a right to resell it.

That's why I think it would be interesting to see the AP discount resale condition challenged. What could make it really interesting though is Ford v John Cena.

 

[Disney Irish]

There's one significant difference here, when you are employed by a merchant you represent that merchant even when you are not at work. When you purchase something with an employee discount and resell it you are ripping off your employer.

When you're a customer of a merchant and you resell something you have legally purchased from that merchant.. even at a discounted price, the merchant loses the right to tell you what you can and cannot do with the item you've purchased once the sale is complete unless it is a non-physical intellectual property like a software. I mentioned Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. because while the ruling was related to copyright, the Supreme Court makes clear that if you own it you have a right to resell it.

That's why I think it would be interesting to see the AP discount resale condition challenged. What could make it really interesting though is Ford v John Cena.

Since you seem to know so much about the topic and obviously have a law degree because keep citing class law trying to prove you're right. I suggest you start contacting all these APs that got their AP revoked and start a class action suit. You might as well try to cash in on it too while you're at it, right?

 

[Darkbeer1]

Here is what AP holders digitalled signed when purchasing the AP. (Bold added)

https://disneyland.disney.go.com/annual-passport-terms-conditions/

>>BENEFITS/DISCOUNTS: A Passholder must present his/her valid Passport and valid photo identification prior to purchases to receive any applicable benefits and discounts. Benefits and discounts are nontransferable and may not be combined with any other offer or promotion. Such benefits and discounts are for personal use only and may not be used for any commercial purpose including, without limitation, to obtain or purchase items or services with the intent to resell such items or services. Merchandise discounts are not valid on: original or consignment art; select limited editions; select collectibles and specialty items (including, without limitation, one-of-a-kind art, Disney-branded original art, celebrity memorabilia, framed Disney Dollars, framed Disney Gift Cards, framed ticket media, Artist Sketch Program (original art), Walt Disney Classics Collection, handmade products (physically touched by an artist/vendor), but not exclusive to stained glass, paper art and sculptures, mosaics, ceramics, and artist-signed Vinylmation); cameras (digital/video/disposable and film); sundries; tobacco; alcohol; newspapers/periodicals; books; personalization including embroidery and D-Tech Me figures; Disney PhotoPass® online purchases and PhotoPass+; Disney Store Online; outdoor vending (e.g., in-Park balloon vendors, glow vendors); postage stamps; rentals (e.g., strollers, ECV); pantry/prepared foods; electronics (MP3 players/video players/video games/CDs/DVDs/videos/software media); treatments and cosmetics; Swarovski Crystal; special orders; purchase-with-purchase offers; gift cards; gift certificates; Park admission; ticket media; arcades; previous purchases; shipping or taxes, or on phone, email, online or mail order purchases. Merchandise discounts are valid at select Disneyland® Resort owned and operated stores and locations. Dining discounts are valid at select Disneyland® Resort owned and operated restaurants and locations and are not valid on alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, room service, holiday buffets, taxes or gratuities. From time to time, select third parties may also offer discounts/benefits to Passholders and such offers shall be solely the responsibility of such third parties without any liability to Disney or its affiliates. Please ask about any applicable discounts at a location prior to purchase. Benefits and discounts are determined solely by Disney or the applicable location/store owner and may change without notice.<<

>>GENERAL: Each Annual Passholder and Disney Premier Passport holder (individually, a “Passholder”) must follow Disneyland® Resort’s procedures to have a photo associated with his/her Passport in Disney’s files for identification purposes. A Passholder must have his/her valid Passport in hand and a proper photo on file with Disney for Disneyland® Theme Park admission. Photos on file for active Passholders must be periodically updated with current photos. At this time, adults must replace their photos every ten (10) years and children (under the age of 18) must replace their photos every three (3) years. Further identification may be required. Passports are not valid for private events or events that require a separate admission, and Passports are subject to applicable Blockout Dates. Passports are nonrefundable, nontransferable and remain the property of Disney. Restrictions apply including, but not limited to, capacity constraints and other closures. Passports do not guarantee Theme Park admission, especially during high attendance periods. Additionally, Passports may not be used for commercial purposes and are void if altered or misused. A Passholder assumes the inherent risks associated with the operation of all rides and attractions and should read and obey all safety signage, instructions and rules. Parks, services, entertainment and attractions may change operating hours, close temporarily, or may otherwise change or be discontinued without notice and without liability. Entry into the Disneyland® Resort constitutes consent for Disney to use any film, video or reproduction of image and/or voice of a Passholder for any purpose whatsoever without any payment to the Passholder. Disney is not responsible for lost or stolen property. A Passholder must abide by any rules and regulations applicable to the Disneyland® Resort or to the use of the Passports as promulgated by Disney from time to time. It is agreed between the owners of the Disneyland® Resort and each Passholder that all claims for injury or loss arising incident to the Passholder’s presence at the Disneyland® Resort shall be litigated in Orange County, California. Disney reserves the right to cancel, suspend or revoke any Passport or deny Theme Park admission to any Passholder at any time for any reason. Cancellation, suspension or revocation of either Disneyland® or Walt Disney World® Passport privileges under the Disney Premier Passport will result in the cancellation, suspension or revocation of all privileges of such Disney Premier Passport.<<

 

[RustySpork]

Since you seem to know so much about the topic and obviously have a law degree because keep citing class law trying to prove you're right. I suggest you start contacting all these APs that got their AP revoked and start a class action suit. You might as well try to cash in on it too while you're at it, right?

I'm such a terrible person for having an interest, and for educating myself a bit in the things that interest me..amirite?

I suppose ignorance and a WDW can do no wrong attitude would be a much better option.

 

[Wrangler-Rick]

If Disney makes those items all available on the Parks App, that whole secondary market would dry up overnight...

 

[RustySpork]

If Disney makes those items all available on the Parks App, that whole secondary market would dry up overnight...

I'm sorry, but we see that you've already purchased more than n number of these, I'm afraid your account cannot purchase any more for y days.

 

[Wrangler-Rick]

I'm sorry, but we see that you've already purchased more than n number of these, I'm afraid your account cannot purchase any more for y days.

If people can buy directly them from Disney, cheaper than from the re-sellers, they’ll buy from Disney. I don’t know what the AP discount is, but if it’s 10% and the resellers can’t make enough profit with just selling the item for list price and have to charge more, then they won’t get anyone to buy it from them, unless they can somehow undercut Disney’s shipping charges....

 

[RustySpork]

If people can buy directly them from Disney, cheaper than from the re-sellers, they’ll buy from Disney. I don’t know what the AP discount is, but if it’s 10% and the resellers can’t make enough profit with just selling the item for list price and have to charge more, then they won’t get anyone to buy it from them, unless they can somehow undercut Disney’s shipping charges....

Absolutely right, the only reason the resale market exists is because Disney limits access to merchandise. The real solution is to open the floodgates so everyone can buy the merchandise. There will always be some limited parks only items like popcorn buckets that have huge resale value, but you can't even use an AP discount on those anyway so the ZOMG DISCOUNT ABUSE argument falls apart on those. If people suddenly stopped using their AP discounts on Disney merchandise in general (10-20%) they are still going to earn quite a bit in resale if people cannot otherwise access the merchandise. Would that be enough to make it OK in the eyes of the detractors?

 

[Darkbeer1]

Let me state a couple of things, basically summarizing the viewpoints of a fair percentage of posters here.

We are happy that Disney, based on the terms and conditions agreed to by the AP, are trying to rein in the abuse of a few AP's that have used their AP's to run underground businesses and take away limited items that run out quickly.

We also think that Disney should change their selling policy to add/lower limits for AP purchases, such as a limit of 2 items per AP holder.

But clearly, Disney has the right to enforce the AP terms and conditions, but it has been shown they do ignore those rules on many of them, so it is good to see

 

[Disney Irish]

I'm such a terrible person for having an interest, and for educating myself a bit in the things that interest me..amirite?

I suppose ignorance and a WDW can do no wrong attitude would be a much better option.

I’m not sure what WDW has to do with this since it’s DLR related. But no one is saying that Disney can do no wrong, just that they aren’t in this instance. Clearly you’re passionate about this. My point with the post, while yes I was poking a little fun, is that if you’re gonna be passionate about it you might as well get paid for it. Unless of course you don’t have a law degree and aren’t actually licensed to practice law.

 

[RustySpork]

I’m not sure what WDW has to do with this since it’s DLR related. But no one is saying that Disney can do no wrong, just that they aren’t in this instance. Clearly you’re passionate about this. My point with the post, while yes I was poking a little fun, is that if you’re gonna be passionate about it you might as well get paid for it. Unless of course you don’t have a law degree and aren’t actually licensed to practice law.

TWDC. I don't care to get paid for it, and I'm also not sorry that I value educating myself and having interest and opinions that you don't share. You obviously think Disney is not in the wrong, which is a fine opinion to have. You don't need a law degree to have a desire to educate yourself and have an educated opinion. I'm sorry that offends you.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

If there is such a "big markup" to be made (it's all relative) then an AP discount won't be a dealbreaker, just less incentive.

Example: You buy a $100 item from WDW with your AP discount for $80, if you sell it on ebay for $100, guess what - you're not making very much at all after ebay takes their cut. You'll make zero on Amazon and even lose money in some categories.

Now, if it's selling on eBay for $300, then it is worth it, and your 20% discount doesn't matter much. Pay full price and make out almost as well.

Also, your AP is not free, for whatever that's worth to the bottom line. But people who are more likely to do this can still get CA and FL resident short-term discounted passes and do it.

People whine about this when they don't realize what they want to buy as a commodity overlaps with a collectibles market.

Nobody says, "Why are they charging $100 for that rare old coin with a face value of 25 cents?" They aren't overcharging. The item is a collectible. It's worth more than it originally was. Yes, sometimes that happens immediately upon production. If Disney doesn't like it, stop making collectibles. Make enough for everybody at reasonable prices. (And that's as ridiculous to dictate to Disney as it is for Disney to dictate to customers what to do with their purchases.)

An item is "worth" what the market will bear at any given time.

Never mind that Disney might pay $2 to manufacture something and sell it for $39, but if someone who visits Disney then tries to resell it for $59 (risking their own money as there are no guarantees) that's where the line is drawn?

I see what they are doing here to get around the fact that you can't restrict the use of something after you sell it. Nobody has the right to an Annual Pass. Nobody has a right to go to Disney World. Any customer can be denied service from any establishment at any time as long as it isn't based on race, religion, etc. (depending on the law.)

If they were being guest-friendly about it, then they wouldn't take an AP without warning while still demanding payment for it. (Unless I am misunderstanding, and the AP is being "suspended" for a year, but if there were 6 months left on it, those 6 months can still be used after the year ends - long after the original expiration date? That's not what it sounded like to me, but I'm happy to be wrong there.)

If they were guest-friendly and not just busting chops, they would send that AP-holder a written warning to cease-and-desist. I think the average person would say, "Oh, OK."

Without a written warning, they should refund part of the AP price or stop taking payments for it.

People who buy and sell are not bad or doing anything wrong. If the average person thought they could go to the supermarket and buy a can of pumpkin and resell it on ebay for $10, they might do it, if it was worth the trouble. (That has happened when there was a shortage.)

The big companies rip everyone off far more and on a vastly larger scale than the average person going to their Walmart to buy clearance items and sell them on eBay do. In fact, the latter are not ripping anyone off at all. They are taking advantage of a situation in which they can legally buy something at a discount and sell it to someone who willingly pays for it because they don't have access to that discount. It's not (presumably) essential food or medicine. It's toys, figurines, books, whatever.

Before the internet, only companies could do that. The internet leveled the playing field (for awhile - it's getting out of whack now) such that when I was a little nerdling collecting coins and baseball cards, if I wanted to sell some of my collection (to buy more!) I had to sell them to the local dealer who would pay me half what they were worth and rightly sell them in his not-rent-free store at full retail price. Now I can be the dealer and sell them online with minimal start-up costs (although it's a lot worse now than when I first did that almost 20 years ago when the barrier to entry at ebay was zero.)

I started my business back then by traveling all over the country, going to record stores, thrift shops, and pawn shops and buying used music, then selling it on eBay. Today they have a fancy name for that: "retail arbitrage" and there are "gurus" who will take your money to teach you what all of us back then taught ourselves.

No one is harmed. One or more jobs are created. There is plenty of risk involved. Sometimes, as in my case, it leads to more traditional retail situations (because selling consistently without wholesalers is pretty difficult) but one is no more noble than the other.

 

[RustySpork]

If there is such a "big markup" to be made (it's all relative) then an AP discount won't be a dealbreaker, just less incentive.

Example: You buy a $100 item from WDW with your AP discount for $80, if you sell it on ebay for $100, guess what - you're not making very much at all after ebay takes their cut. You'll make zero on Amazon and even lose money in some categories.

Now, if it's selling on eBay for $300, then it is worth it, and your 20% discount doesn't matter much. Pay full price and make out almost as well.

Also, your AP is not free, for whatever that's worth to the bottom line. But people who are more likely to do this can still get CA and FL resident short-term discounted passes and do it.

People whine about this when they don't realize what they want to buy as a commodity overlaps with a collectibles market.

Nobody says, "Why are they charging $100 for that rare old coin with a face value of 25 cents?" They aren't overcharging. The item is a collectible. It's worth more than it originally was. Yes, sometimes that happens immediately upon production. If Disney doesn't like it, stop making collectibles. Make enough for everybody at reasonable prices. (And that's as ridiculous to dictate to Disney as it is for Disney to dictate to customers what to do with their purchases.)

An item is "worth" what the market will bear at any given time.

Never mind that Disney might pay $2 to manufacture something and sell it for $39, but if someone who visits Disney then tries to resell it for $59 (risking their own money as there are no guarantees) that's where the line is drawn?

I see what they are doing here to get around the fact that you can't restrict the use of something after you sell it. Nobody has the right to an Annual Pass. Nobody has a right to go to Disney World. Any customer can be denied service from any establishment at any time as long as it isn't based on race, religion, etc. (depending on the law.)

If they were being guest-friendly about it, then they wouldn't take an AP without warning while still demanding payment for it. (Unless I am misunderstanding, and the AP is being "suspended" for a year, but if there were 6 months left on it, those 6 months can still be used after the year ends - long after the original expiration date? That's not what it sounded like to me, but I'm happy to be wrong there.)

If they were guest-friendly and not just busting chops, they would send that AP-holder a written warning to cease-and-desist. I think the average person would say, "Oh, OK."

Without a written warning, they should refund part of the AP price or stop taking payments for it.

People who buy and sell are not bad or doing anything wrong. If the average person thought they could go to the supermarket and buy a can of pumpkin and resell it on ebay for $10, they might do it, if it was worth the trouble. (That has happened when there was a shortage.)

The big companies rip everyone off far more and on a vastly larger scale than the average person going to their Walmart to buy clearance items and sell them on eBay do. In fact, the latter are not ripping anyone off at all. They are taking advantage of a situation in which they can legally buy something at a discount and sell it to someone who willingly pays for it because they don't have access to that discount. It's not (presumably) essential food or medicine. It's toys, figurines, books, whatever.

Before the internet, only companies could do that. The internet leveled the playing field (for awhile - it's getting out of whack now) such that when I was a little nerdling collecting coins and baseball cards, if I wanted to sell some of my collection (to buy more!) I had to sell them to the local dealer who would pay me half what they were worth and rightly sell them in his not-rent-free store at full retail price. Now I can be the dealer and sell them online with minimal start-up costs (although it's a lot worse now than when I first did that almost 20 years ago when the barrier to entry at ebay was zero.)

I started my business back then by traveling all over the country, going to record stores, thrift shops, and pawn shops and buying used music, then selling it on eBay. Today they have a fancy name for that: "retail arbitrage" and there are "gurus" who will take your money to teach you what all of us back then taught ourselves.

No one is harmed. One or more jobs are created. There is plenty of risk involved. Sometimes, as in my case, it leads to more traditional retail situations (because selling consistently without wholesalers is pretty difficult) but one is no more noble than the other.

HOW DARE YOU BUY THINGS AND RESELL THEM TO PEOPLE THAT WANT TO BUY THEM YOU EVIL CAPITALIST PIG!

/s

 

[Tony the Tigger]

As to theoretical lawsuits:

We had a lawsuit in our industry several years back. One of my best selling categories were the CD's or records that have "loaned for promotional use only" stamped or imprinted on them in some way.

Naturally, those are the most collectible and valuable music media items because you can't just go into a department store and buy one (although record stores have sold them forever, because people go into the record store and trade them in or sell them to the store.)

Sometimes, those items have versions of songs that are never commercially released, making them even more desirable to fans and collectors.

For awhile, in the early days of eBay, we learned the hard way that some artists and labels were great at chair-surfing. Prince, Tori Amos, and others would have eBay take promo items down. eBay didn't want to get involved, so they complied, and warned the sellers, sometimes suspending their accounts for a short while. Meanwhile thousands of other promo items sold daily without incident, and they were not prohibited by eBay.

The reason they were marked "promotional" is because they were given, in the artists' own self interest, to radio stations, to club DJ's, and some directly to fans to actively promote a new song or album. But they didn't want the DJ's selling them. They also never collected them back, so the whole "loaned" thing was really just a suggestion. Also, the record labels weren't raiding local record stores, they were just busting eBay sellers, because that's easier. But if a DJ sold his collection to a record store or pawn shop, and I bought it from them, why shouldn't I be able to sell it?

One eBay seller (not me) did go to court, and won. Promo items are fully safe to sell on eBay and you can't get suspended for it.

Again, I think WDW gets around the conflict by simply suspending an AP, not restricting access via other means. I do think they can restrict sales to fewer than 10 pieces, and more routinely. (Then again - they do want to sell things, right?!)

What if an AP buys things at WDW or DL but never shows their AP card, and pays full price? How would that factor in?

What if someone from Ohio buys a 4 day ticket (or however it works for people from Ohio) and turns their family vacation into a working vacation, and spends $50K on full price merch because they (correctly or otherwise) think they can sell it on eBay during holiday selling time? Businesses spend that much on merch all the time, no biggie, plus vacation!

 

[Tony the Tigger]

HOW DARE YOU BUY THINGS AND RESELL THEM TO PEOPLE THAT WANT TO BUY THEM YOU EVIL CAPITALIST PIG!

/s

Down with all stores! LOL.

 

[Disney Irish]

TWDC. I don't care to get paid for it, and I'm also not sorry that I value educating myself and having interest and opinions that you don't share. You obviously think Disney is not in the wrong, which is a fine opinion to have. You don't need a law degree to have a desire to educate yourself and have an educated opinion. I'm sorry that offends you.

I’m not offended at all by your opinion. It’s just a discussion, nothing to get offended about. Also I’m all about educating ones self. I learned a lot by reading that case law you cited, I just interpreted differently than you do. And since this isn’t a court of law nothing will be settled here.

 

[SuddenStorm]

I wouldn't say that's the same thing.
Watching a park ride is not the same as riding it. A park ride has movements, effects, temperatures, etc. that one can't get on youtube.
A movie doesn't have these, which is why it's more problematic.
Plus there's MANY rides that no longer exist that can ONLY be found on youtube. Making it illegal or pulling it off will cause a lot of anger and boycotting. This is why nintendo suing rom sites is such a big issue right now, as for some people, that's the only way to experience some games, especially with resellers selling the games at high prices and modern tvs no longer supporting those consoles.

It's a better comparison than you're giving credit.

Watch cam footage of a film is different then watching it in the theater- the sound, comfort, and video quality should be vastly superior in the theater.

 

[Nick Pappagiorgio]

What I don’t understand is why they don’t make everything that’s available at the park available on the shop Disney Parks app? A lot of the collectible stuff is always available “in store only.” Then they could have each item be limited to 1-2 quantity max for each AP. Of course, non APs could still find ways to get as many as they want but would it matter if Disney is getting paid full price?

Is this maybe about Disney thinking they could convert some of these people that hire personal shoppers into guests or APs if less flippers or personal shoppers were around? Or is this about the effect that flippers may have on phased roll outs of certain items? If Disney is trying to create a demand and the Flippers / APs are buying everything at a discounted price then Disney is losing a little bit of potential profit in the long run. I just can’t imagine it’s a whole lot.

What I do know is they re not revoking people’s passes because they care about fans/ guests not getting a particular item.

I've been buying off the app since it started. Intially it was great, as there were relatively few items that were not included, most of which were the more obscure non Disney items (things like Beetles shirts in the UK pavilion). Initially all of the items shipped out of a parks warehouse somewhere near the parks. Sometime in the last 2 years or so there was a shift and all the ship to home items on the app now come from Memphis which is where the Shop Disney east coast warehouse is as well. When that change was made the number of available items was vastly reduced. Jim Hill (who i take with a grain of salt but seems plaisable here) answered a question on this a couple months ago on this. He said that the Florida merch people had a hard time adjusting, and dealing with online consumers as well as theme park buyers who had different consumption habits.

 

[Nick Pappagiorgio]

I'm curious on how enforcement is working here. I've never had an AP on either coast so forgive my ignorance. At DL do they scan your AP every time you get your discount, or are they simply finding people selling online and matching them up with someone on the AP rolls. My impression was that WDW APs are not scanned for discounts.