Is this a Disney copyright violation?

[LoriMistress]

I had a copyright violation question, too. At a local cinema, they have a room which guests can rent to host parties, and I noticed they had several Disney characters painted on the walls, (also a couple of Dreamworks characters). Are they violating any copyrights with these painted images? If so, should someone be notified or is it no big deal?

Here's a pic of the room:

Disney will force the company to remove the Disney paintings immediately.

http://www.snopes.com/disney/wdco/daycare.asp

 

[mkt]

Perhaps it is one small step in the pursuit of knowledge.

I've always questioned why people are so often questioned for asking questions...

Questioning is a vicious cycle.

 

[jmvd20]

Questioning is a vicious cycle.

Why is that?

 

[Sam02]

:ROFLOL: Ya, I'm glad that Disney, ummm...Disney-fied the stories. LOL However, I think there's still a place for the original versions, and I'm glad I have a copy of that book. That's just one example among many, but the original Grimms versions are much more gorey and serious.

How about the ending for The Little Mermaid. She dies in that one. The original just doesn't help with the "Happily Ever After" aspect that Disney likes.

Although I have to say I like the originals better than the PC versions I saw put into print years ago. I'm pretty sure they were done as a spoof because the lengths the writers had to go to "fix" them.

 

[yankspy]

Questioning is a vicious cycle.

Yes it is, but in the end (points to signature).

 

[DizneyPryncess]

How about the ending for The Little Mermaid. She dies in that one. The original just doesn't help with the "Happily Ever After" aspect that Disney likes.

Although I have to say I like the originals better than the PC versions I saw put into print years ago. I'm pretty sure they were done as a spoof because the lengths the writers had to go to "fix" them.

Ugh - I just read the ending of the real Little Mermaid, it was just disturbing. The original Pinocchio bothers me too. Anyone else have the book "Mouse Under Glass"? It tells the back stories of tons of Disney movies, and how they were adapted by Disney. It's really interesting.

As for the copyright stuff....I can say this. My sister in law owns her own bath & body shop where she makes all her own products. She travels to trade shows where she sells wholesale to other stores. She said the people who own Basin come to the shows and make sure nobody is selling anything that would resemble Disney. exp. mickey head soaps. So Disney seems to keep up w/even the smallest places.

 

[yankspy]

Ugh - I just read the ending of the real Little Mermaid, it was just disturbing. The original Pinocchio bothers me too. Anyone else have the book "Mouse Under Glass"? It tells the back stories of tons of Disney movies, and how they were adapted by Disney. It's really interesting.

As for the copyright stuff....I can say this. My sister in law owns her own bath & body shop where she makes all her own products. She travels to trade shows where she sells wholesale to other stores. She said the people who own Basin come to the shows and make sure nobody is selling anything that would resemble Disney. exp. mickey head soaps. So Disney seems to keep up w/even the smallest places.

Didn't Gepetto kill Jiminy in the book?

 

[syandell2000]

While I've been in London this summer, I've passed this ice cream truck many times(along with several by the same company) parked on streets near the Globe Theatre.

I assume Disney only pursues this big shots (and those closest to home) for copyright violations.

 

[sbkline]

Ugh - I just read the ending of the real Little Mermaid, it was just disturbing. The original Pinocchio bothers me too. Anyone else have the book "Mouse Under Glass"? It tells the back stories of tons of Disney movies, and how they were adapted by Disney. It's really interesting.

I didn't know that the Little Mermaid was a Fairy Tale before Disney adapted it. It's either not Grimm's, or I just hadn't read that one in my book. It's a pretty thick book with lots of stories in it, and I never did read all of them.

Even as a child/adolescent, reading those stories, I wouldn't say any of them ever bothered me though. I just took them for what they were...stories with a moral lesson written years ago. The violence and gore never bothered or disturbed me. If I get time today, I may pull that book out and see if it has the original Pinocchio and Little Mermaid in it.

 

[lilclerk]

I didn't know that the Little Mermaid was a Fairy Tale before Disney adapted it. It's either not Grimm's, or I just hadn't read that one in my book. It's a pretty thick book with lots of stories in it, and I never did read all of them.

Little Mermaid was Hans Christian Anderson, and Pinocchio was by Carlo Collodi (sp?)

 

[TLS]

To answer the original question which seemed to drift....

I've checked several Disney "Items" here at home, and all of them seem to have the © symbol either before or after Disney on the tag, or printed somewhere on the item.

There has been past talk about counterfeit ©Disney items.


So, I would say, if it looks counterfeit, and it doesn't have the © symbol on it, it most likely IS counterfeit.

 

[mickeyandkrunch]

Different question on copyright products. Mousesurplus sells Replica atrifacts on Ebay. I bought an original from Disney Shopping. My mother wanted one and DS was sold out. I found one on EBay but it did not have the copyright logo. MS told me it was a replica. Is this Legal? They have replica banners, props, and trash can plaques. How do they get away with it? Thanks

 

[MousDad]

Names or titles of any kind are not copyrightable and cannot be protected under U.S. Copyright Law. They can be trademarked with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Pictoral artwork is protected by copyright, and I would assume TWDC is very protective of their ownership of this material.

 

[Tweedle Adie]

The reason for the darkness of original fairy tales is that they were written in dark times, where death was common place. Ring around the rosey dealt is about the black plague. Children dealt with horrible things every day, children today need the Disney-fied versions with the happy ending. I need the happy ending

 

[WishIwasThere]

I had a copyright violation question, too. At a local cinema, they have a room which guests can rent to host parties, and I noticed they had several Disney characters painted on the walls, (also a couple of Dreamworks characters). Are they violating any copyrights with these painted images? If so, should someone be notified or is it no big deal?

Here's a pic of the room:

Talk to the people who had Disney characters painted on the walls of their daycare center in Floriday...They will tell you that it is a violation.

 

[krankenstein]

Different question on copyright products. Mousesurplus sells Replica atrifacts on Ebay. I bought an original from Disney Shopping. My mother wanted one and DS was sold out. I found one on EBay but it did not have the copyright logo. MS told me it was a replica. Is this Legal? They have replica banners, props, and trash can plaques. How do they get away with it? Thanks

MouseSurplus carries real items, nothing they have is a replica of the original unless stated. They are an authorized Disney clearinghouse. Which basically means if Disney can't sale something or they remove something from the parks or resorts (i.e. banners, ride cars, trash cans, sound equipment), they sale those items to MouseSurplus. MouseSurplus than sales them to you for a profit. Anything you have from MousSurplus is a real Disney product or artifact.

 

[Eyorefan]

Names or titles of any kind are not copyrightable and cannot be protected under U.S. Copyright Law. They can be trademarked with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Pictoral artwork is protected by copyright, and I would assume TWDC is very protective of their ownership of this material.

You stole my answer. And to answer the other question, even if Disney wanted to, they couldn't get a trademark for the names of the princesses, Sleeping Buety, Cinderella ext. because those are stories that are in the public domain. I think a new character has a set number of years after is it has been created that it can be protected by copywrite before it enters the public domain. Disney resently pressured congress and got them to issue an exception for Mickey Mouse and firends (since copywrites are issued by the Liberary of Congress, Congress has the ultimite say in copywrites)

Oh, and I also wanted to throw in the Disney changed the ending of the Pretty Women script too. The way it was first written, Julia Roberts was suppose to return to her appartment and find her roommate dead from a druge overdose. They changed it to make it "Disney".

 

[fosse76]

Disney did NOT get an exception for Mickey Mouse, et al. They were one of dozens of companies that lobbied Congress to extend the length of copyrights, and they succeeded. Congress ultimately decides on copyright law and ownership, but would not grant individual exemtions.

As for the other question, as to whether or not using copyrighted characters is a violation, it depends. Technically, for it to be a violation, there must be monetary damages against the copyright owner. The violator must be receiving income that would otherwise go to the copyright holder. In the case of the cinema, unless they are advertising it as the "Disney Room" they aren't technically violating the law. Disney would have to prove that the cinema is making money from the use of the characters on the wall. However, if this is one of several rooms, and this is the only one that has a Disney motif (the oddly painted Shrek notwithstanding), Disney would have a stronger claim. From what I understand of the daycare center situation, the presentation of the characters could reasonably have been understood to be affiliated with the Disney Company, and their presence may have positively impacted business (in which case they were profiting off the images).

 

[donniedisney]

whats a pink pauper?

pink panther playing the prince and the pauper?

 

[PuertoRekinSam]

Folktales and Farrytales

There is an excelent book out there "Best-Loved Folktales of the World" selected and with and introduction by Joanna Cole (ISBN 0-385-18949-4) which explains some of the background of the folktales/farrytales:

"Because they are the products of preliterate societies, the folktales, unlike our modern novels and short stories were not invented by a single author and printed in a book to be unchanged forever. Instead, they were passed by word of mouth from one teller to another. Never told the exactly the same way twice. ..... Thus the stories express the wishes, hopes, and fears of many people rather then the concerns of a particular writer. hey deal wth universal human dilemmas that span difference of age culture and geography."

The brothers Grimm were not the creators of the classic stories, they were the first to publish them. Cinderella has a few "classic" variations. The prementioned "Toes and Heals" of the Gimm publication. An earlier version had Fur Slippers not Glass Slippers.

The little Mermaid is a fairytale... but more along the short story concept of Pooh or Peter Pan... One confirmed author not an oral tradition passed down through the ages.