Why am I reminded of a Simpsons episode?

This is a general discussion. If your topic doesn't fit anywhere else, put it here.
Post Reply
LittleDollClaudia
Seasoned Pro
Seasoned Pro
Posts: 669
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 2:00 pm
Location: I am Jack's lack of surprise..
Contact:

Why am I reminded of a Simpsons episode?

Post by LittleDollClaudia » Thu Feb 15, 2007 3:25 am

Producers of a play scheduled to be staged by the gay and lesbian student's society at NUI Galway have promised ticket refunds after the Disney company threatened legal action against them.
NUI Galway's GigSoc were threatened with legal action by Disney when it was discovered the society were to stage an adaptation of the Whoopi Goldberg film, 'Sister Act', whihch was produced by the entertainment corporation.

With only two days to go before opening night, the NUI Galway students were forced to pull the production.

In a letter sent via a Dublin-based solicitor, Disney said the performance would breach its intellectual property rights and threatened legal proceedings if the play went ahead.

The play's producer, Jeff Rockett, told the Irish Times that cast members were "completely devastated" by the turn of events.

"Six months of hard work, all for nothing. Cast and crew had given up their weekends and any spare time to rehearse and promote the play," he said. "They are simply in disbelief that something they have poured their hearts and souls into has been destroyed by an organisation that has brought joy to many of them in their younger years.

"We are dumbfounded by Disney's stance towards what is a charitable, non-profit-making society, aimed at promoting safety and integration for the student LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] community. We were just having fun."

Tickets to GigSoc's cancelled performances will be refunded through Galway's Town Hall Theatre.

So wait a doggone second here. There can be a Beauty and the Beast, Little Mermaid, Lion King, Tarzan and Mary Poppins musicals, but not a play based on Sister Act?!?! Oh that's right. Disney won't make any money from the latter. Shame on you folks!


Image

^^ Hey, that's me! ^^

mentu
Repeat Traveler
Repeat Traveler
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 11:01 am

Re: Why am I reminded of a Simpsons episode?

Post by mentu » Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:18 am

Did they get permission to perform the show? It's a matter of protecting intellectual property.



User avatar
BRWombat
Permanent Fixture
Permanent Fixture
Posts: 5131
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:00 pm
Department: Offsite Harmony
Position: Back Row Baritone
Location: Dallas area
Contact:

Re: Why am I reminded of a Simpsons episode?

Post by BRWombat » Thu Feb 15, 2007 3:00 pm

LittleDollClaudia wrote:So wait a doggone second here. There can be a Beauty and the Beast, Little Mermaid, Lion King, Tarzan and Mary Poppins musicals...
All produced by Disney or with their permission...
LittleDollClaudia wrote:... but not a play based on Sister Act?!?!
...done without their permission. No shame here, just business, and good business practices at that. They own the material, they get to call the shots. (Just try to put on any Broadway show, even at a junior high or high school, without getting permission from MTI or wherever, and watch how quick you get slapped down!)


"This would be a great place if we could only get rid of all these people." - Walt Disney

Image Image
VocalMajority
Twitter

Rob562
Regular Guest
Regular Guest
Posts: 352
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 11:50 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Why am I reminded of a Simpsons episode?

Post by Rob562 » Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:40 pm

BRWombat wrote:Just try to put on any Broadway show, even at a junior high or high school, without getting permission from MTI or wherever, and watch how quick you get slapped down!
I can second that one... At my community theater group, we'd filed for and gotten permission to perform "Fiddler on the Roof" a few years ago, but then had the rights pulled back by the owning company (MTI, Rogers & Hammerstein, whoever it was) at the last minute before auditions because a touring company was coming to Boston and had exclusive rights to the show within 50 miles. But because of the timing, our posting for auditions had already gone to the newspaper and we couldn't cancel it. You should have seen how fast we were contacted when the ad ran a day or two later... We ended up scrambling around and doing "Meet Me in St. Louis" that year.

-Rob



User avatar
BRWombat
Permanent Fixture
Permanent Fixture
Posts: 5131
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:00 pm
Department: Offsite Harmony
Position: Back Row Baritone
Location: Dallas area
Contact:

Re: Why am I reminded of a Simpsons episode?

Post by BRWombat » Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:03 am

I've heard of that happening before, Rob. And we all know how protective Disney is of their intellectual property rights... not just because of the $$$ (though I'm sure that's a HUGE part of it -- this is Disney we're talking about!), but also because unauthorized use can (1) possibly reflect badly on Disney's image and (2) in some instances cost them their rights. The last reason is why Coca-Cola has people who go into a restaurant and order a "Coke," and if they are served a Pepsi or other cola, that restaurant will get a polite but threatening letter to properly use the brand name or else; and why Xerox resists people's efforts to use the word "xerox" as a verb (trademarks are adjectives, as in "Xerox brand copiers"). If a trademark becomes a generic term for a type of something, anyone can use it -- like "aspirin," which used to be a brand name owned exclusively by Bayer.

As for the first reason, back in the 70's the dad of a close friend of mine spotted, of all things, a liquor store with a large painting on the side of the building of Goofy holding a six-pack of beer!! He took a picture and sent it to Disney to let them know, and that liquor store promptly was hit with a not-so-polite threatening letter -- and the mural was painted over. (As for my friend's dad, he was rewarded with free WDW passes for his entire family! I've been trying to spot unsavory misuses of Disney characters ever since, but haven't seen any yet, dang it.)

Sorry for the intellectual property rant... it's just rare for me to encounter a topic I actually know anything about... :rolleyes:


"This would be a great place if we could only get rid of all these people." - Walt Disney

Image Image
VocalMajority
Twitter

leftcoaster
Seasoned Pro
Seasoned Pro
Posts: 947
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 11:17 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: Why am I reminded of a Simpsons episode?

Post by leftcoaster » Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:28 pm

Not unlike the threatened lawsuit to a three Florida day care centers:

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

When Disney discovered in 1989 that three Hallandale, Florida, day care centers had 5-foot-high likenesses of trademarked Disney characters such as Mickey Mouse, Minnie Mouse, and Goofy painted on their walls, Disney threatened to go to court if the centers did not remove the drawings. The threat of legal action did not need to be carried out, as the centers replaced the drawings with cartoon characters belonging to Universal Studios Florida and Hanna-Barbera Productions, who volunteered the use of their character art as part of a publicity ploy.

Disney demanded that the unauthorized 5-foot-high painted figures of Disney characters on the walls of Very Important Babies Daycare, Good Godmother Daycare, and Temple Messianique (all in Hallandale, Florida) be removed for valid business reasons: infringements must be fought in order to keep trademarks intact; other Disney character licensees would have grounds to object if Disney provided inexpensive (or free) licenses to the centers (which are, after all, profit-making enterprises); and the use of Disney characters falsely suggested Disney's affiliation with the day care facilities.

Disney had also just dealt competing Universal Studios a severe blow in the theme park business by opening its Disney-MGM Studios park in Orlando, Florida, several months ahead of the completion of Universal Studios' own Orlando-based studio theme park. Universal, still smarting from the early opening of Disney's studio-themed park (Universal had been planning such a park in Orlando since 1981 but had been struggling with the financing) and claiming that some of the ideas for Disney's park had been stolen from them (Universal alleged that Michael Eisner had seen the plans for their park when he worked for Paramount), saw in the day care controversy a way to seize some publicity for themselves and give Disney a bad name in Florida as part of the bargain. Accordingly, Universal Studios Florida and Hanna-Barbera Productions offered the centers the use of characters from their own cartoons, such as Scooby-Doo, the Flintstones, the Jetsons, and Yogi Bear. Universal and Hanna-Barbera then held a special ceremony showcasing the newly-redecorated day care centers at the Temple Messanique on August 8, 1989, attended by costumed characters and executives from both organizations.



User avatar
hobie16
Permanent Fixture
Permanent Fixture
Posts: 10546
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 4:45 pm
Park: DLR
Department: Fruity Drink Land
Position: Mai Tai Face Plant
Location: 717 Miles NNW Of DLR

Re: Why am I reminded of a Simpsons episode?

Post by hobie16 » Fri Feb 16, 2007 7:21 pm

What's good for the goose...

Judge: Winnie the Pooh stays with his owner
California court rule dismisses attempt by families of A.A. Milne and original illustrator to assign character to Disney.
February 16 2007: 5:06 PM EST

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) -- A federal judge in Los Angeles has rejected a Walt Disney Co.-backed attempt to strip rights to the "Winnie the Pooh" character from the estate of long-time Pooh licensee Stephen Slesinger, according to court documents made public Friday.

In a written order issued on Thursday, U.S. District Judge Florence-Marie Cooper granted the Slesingers' motion to dismiss the case, in which the granddaughters of Pooh author A.A. Milne and illustrator E.H. Shepard, sued to terminate the Slesingers' rights to the character and reassign them to Disney.

Disney was not a party to the case, but the company paid legal expenses for both women, according to Disney's attorney Daniel Petrocelli.

Petrocelli said the ruling "has no bearing whatsoever on Disney's rights to Pooh," nor on a 2004 California state court judgment dismissing the Slesingers' long-standing royalty claims against Disney.

Slesinger's widow and daughter have been battling Disney in California state court for more than a decade over what they claim are billions in unpaid royalties from Pooh, which generated more than $6 billion in retail sales in 2005.

That state court case is on appeal and a settlement does not appear likely.

"If there were a reasonable view of their royalty interest, we could settle it in a heartbeat," Petrocelli said.

The federal case also appears at a standstill as a result of Thursday's ruling.

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear the federal case and let stand decisions by two lower courts that Clare Milne could not void a 1983 agreement renewing the Slesingers' license.

Cooper's order on Thursday rejected similar claims by Shepard's granddaughter, Harriet Jessie Minette Hunt, who must now decide whether to appeal the case, Petrocelli said.

Stephen Slesinger, a New York television and film producer, obtained the exclusive merchandising and other rights to the Pooh works from A.A. Milne in 1930.

Slesinger and Milne's widow passed those rights to Disney in 1961 in exchange for royalties from the sale of Pooh products.

The Slesingers last month also filed a claim with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, seeking to cancel a number of trademarks they claim Disney illegally took out on Pooh.


Image

Don't be fooled by appearances. In Hawaii, some of the most powerful people look like bums and stuntmen.
--- Matt King


Stay low and run in a zigzag pattern.

Post Reply