• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

News Strange rule for Club Cool farewell

disney4life2008

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
That would be corporate suicide on a grand scale...
Noooo that would never happen. I think Coke is too strong in Disney. And I would disown disney if they ever went to Pepsi.
 

SirWillow

Well-Known Member
Saw this video recently:

has some fun info on what Photopass Photographers can and can't take pictures of...
Hey, I know that guy from somewhere....

SirWillow is also on the forums

@SirWillow
Oh, that's right! It's me! :p
@WDW862 thank you for the shoutout to let me know. And
At this point, I’m convinced that cast members simply make up things to see if guests will unwittingly go along with it.
maybe sometimes. But in this case, no, they aren't making it up. Because the Coke symbol is a trademarked logo, and Disney would be selling that photo for money, they would have to pay Coke a part of the proceeds, a licensing fee essentially, in order to use their logo in the photo. And Disney doesn't want to do that. So no logos or brand names in the Photopass photos- at least not ones that the park is "in control of" such as on signage.
 

SirWillow

Well-Known Member
There is a common myth in the world of filmmaking and photography that anytime something with a brand name or logo would be visible, that the brand name or logo must be covered for legal reasons. There is actually no legal basis for this what-so-ever, so long as the people involved are just being seen using the product in a normal, average manner. If someone is drinking a can of Coke in a movie, for example, there's no need to obscure the name or the logo. Certainly, someone taking a photo in a theme park has no need what-so-ever to cover the logo.
Not exactly. If it was a photo that a guest was taking it's not a problem since it's non-commercial photography. As far as Coke is concerned, that's free publicity and there's no money involved so it doesn't infringe on anything.

However, Disney photopass photos are commercial photography. They are being sold at a profit to others, and if that logo is in the photo, then Disney is now making money at Coke's expense. That's a whole different can of worms, and doing that Coke would then be entitled to a portion of that money being made because they are contributing to it. Easiest solution- make sure the logo isn't in the photo so Disney doesn't have to pay Coke for it.

and you see a Coke can in a movie you can bet that there was some money or signed agreements made for it to happen. It's well known that firms like Coke and Pepsi work deals for "product placement" in films. It's not done free or without legal contracts being done.

The Photopass picture is a picture that is being sold to the guests and thus leaves Disney open to potential sales of a product co-branded product that Coke and Disney have no agreement on. If it were a private picture or a picture that wasn't monitiezed, there'd be no issues. But with the monitization aspect of a Disney Photopass picture, I'm sure the overall rule is for Photopass photogs to avoid logos where they can as to not open up Disney for lawsuits.
You got it.
Lawsuits or having to share the funds and figuring out how many photos with which logos were sold for how much... ick. Just easier to not mess with it.
 

Figments Friend

Well-Known Member
I hate Coke. It’s everywhere. I’m a Pepsi and Dew guy through and through. Here in central Florida all the theme parks serve Coke products...Disney, Universal, Legoland, Sea World And Busch Gardens...you just can’t get away from it. What’s even crappier is you can’t even get a Dr Pepper or Surge anywhere either. I know Pepper isn’t a Coke product, but they often team up with them...but Surge is a Coke product...

I miss the days when you had variety at the parks...

Heck, the Sea World/Busch parks and Cypress Gardens used to serve Pepsi.... better times....
How about Mr. Pibb?
I was first introduced to it in Florida in the 80s and liked it a lot.
Never saw it up here in the North until the early 2000s.
It's a Coca-Cola product now, thus it's much easier to find now then before it seems.

At least CEC has Pepsi distribution now.
You must have been thrilled when the company made the switch some years ago!
;)

-
 

celluloid

Well-Known Member
How so? In the early years of both DL and MK, Pepsi and Coke were both corporate sponsors and were served simultaneously in each park. Pepsi sponsored facilities and was served on the west side of the parks, while Coke sponsored facilities and was served on the east side.





Even though Pepsi's influence has been forever immortalized in Henry's exclamation at the top of the show that the bears "have a lot to give," which was a reference to the "You've got a lot to give, Pepsi's got a lot to give" slogan of that era.

It was a harmonious relationship that was renegotiated when the contracts expired. There's no reason to think that Disney wouldn't consider renegotiating its current contract when it expires too, if they saw a benefit to switching to a different provider. Sponsorships and corporate partnerships come and go all the time. How would this one be any different?
Even though the sponsorship of the Country Bear Jamboree is long gone, Pepsi's influence has been forever immortalized in Henry's exclamation at the top of the show that the bears "have a lot to give," which was a reference to the "You've got a lot to give, Pepsi's got a lot to give" slogan of that era.
Your points remain valid but I am fairly certain that the reference was finally removed durring the refurbishment and editing down of the show about five years ago now.

Also, I am sure it is a company by company basis on what they want and are willing to share(or willing to pay/sacrafice to not share with competetor ad space or products in the park, resort movie etc...

but for anyone that doubts it could happen just because Coke and Pepsi margins are so far apart, look at Joffery's and Starbucks.
 

Cmdr_Crimson

Well-Known Member
Not exactly. If it was a photo that a guest was taking it's not a problem since it's non-commercial photography. As far as Coke is concerned, that's free publicity and there's no money involved so it doesn't infringe on anything.

However, Disney photopass photos are commercial photography. They are being sold at a profit to others, and if that logo is in the photo, then Disney is now making money at Coke's expense. That's a whole different can of worms, and doing that Coke would then be entitled to a portion of that money being made because they are contributing to it. Easiest solution- make sure the logo isn't in the photo so Disney doesn't have to pay Coke for it.

and you see a Coke can in a movie you can bet that there was some money or signed agreements made for it to happen. It's well known that firms like Coke and Pepsi work deals for "product placement" in films. It's not done free or without legal contracts being done.


You got it.
Lawsuits or having to share the funds and figuring out how many photos with which logos were sold for how much... ick. Just easier to not mess with it.
So, if someone is wearing a small nike or Coke logo on their shirt does it get blurred out when you view it on photopass?
 

Jon81uk

Well-Known Member
and you see a Coke can in a movie you can bet that there was some money or signed agreements made for it to happen. It's well known that firms like Coke and Pepsi work deals for "product placement" in films. It's not done free or without legal contracts being done.
My favourite story of product licensing was when M&Ms were approached about their candy being used in ET when Elliot uses a trail of sweets to get ET to approach. M&Ms said no, it seems creepy that an alien is meeting a child. So Universal went to Hershey's and asked if they could use Reeses Pieces, they said yes and sales of Reeses Pieces really increased following the films success!
 

DisneyCane

Well-Known Member
So, if someone is wearing a small nike or Coke logo on their shirt does it get blurred out when you view it on photopass?
Based on the video above I don't think so. In that case, the guest already paid Coke for the logo via the cost of the shirt which is higher than the same shirt would be if it was blank. With the cups, Coke is essentially paying Disney so they don't want Disney getting paid for the logo.

In reality it probably has more to do with the legalities of protecting trademarks. If they allowed Disney to sell their logo as part of a picture a shirt manufacturer could try and make the case that Coke, by extension is giving permission to others to sell items with the Coke logo without compensation.
 

The Empress Lilly

Well-Known Member
The OP is correct.

Me I've got 'I ♡ Walmart' tattooed on my forehead, and so WDW declines to sell me a PhotoPass subscription.

I also have to transfer $0.45 to the Walton family every time I take a holiday picture, plus $0.12 every time I look in a mirror
 

SirWillow

Well-Known Member
So, if someone is wearing a small nike or Coke logo on their shirt does it get blurred out when you view it on photopass?
It's signage and logos that Disney has full control over. So in the case of shirts worn by guests, no it won't get blurred out (though if it is a product that Disney doesn't want it's product and characters to be associated with, they will find creative ways to hide the logos, such as have the character block it or put the guest behind others). But when it's things that Disney does have control over- signs in the parks and stores being the biggest example- then they won't shoot it.

Its why when we were shooting photos at Rock N Roller Coaster we were supposed to cover up both the Hanes logoed guitar pick and at least part of Aerosmith's name. In fact that spot was kind of a sore spot and had issues because of some photographer's inability to do that, causing the QA department to have to be careful in screening and sometimes have to "hide" the photos from the guests so they couldn't be sold.
 
Top Bottom