Comments on: Disney copyright scandal

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 23:04:35 +0000

your an asshole.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 20:17:34 +0000

WON’T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE DEAD CHILDREN!!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 08:03:40 +0000

I’m saddened as well. Keep this feeling in mind next time you think about taking your kids to see a Disney film. Disney doesn’t really care about them.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 07:17:04 +0000

Oh, but Scott they are in process of allowing it, why does that make them evil? Well simply put, they only agreed to “process their request” after the media and average folks like you and I called them out for what they were. A big heartless company that only views us as cash cows, period.

This is terrible loss and any person can and should understand that.

The parents were comforted in knowing that their stillborn child would have adored Pooh. Disney (in my opinion) was irritated by the fact that they wouldn’t make a dime off of it. I bet A. A. Milne (creator) is rolling over in his grave right now. He created the wonderful Pooh books for and based off of his son. A man who obviously valued children and family. To not allow such a symbol is a crime that goes beyond infringement.

This story has made me sad, even though the family is going to get what they originally wanted for child.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 00:34:38 +0000

You raise interesting points. It’s ironic that Disney pushed to the extreme to get copyright extended in the US to protect Micky Mouse. Every sword has two edges.

If Disney had better PR skills they would have just paid the paltry amount required and used it as a warm fuzzy press release. Good PR instead of bad.

Yes sir, I’d call them greedy to a fault.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 22:33:07 +0000

As I understand it, the Great Ormond Street Hospital has been granted an *eternal* copyright in the UK. That’s not something I find it easy to support. I think part of the issue between them and Disney had to do with the book being out of copyright in the USA, where the film was made… and I’m not happy about copyright laws being applied extra-territorially either. So although I’m no great fan of Disney, I’m not sure I’d describe them as “weaselling out” of paying royalties for Peter Pan unless they had an actual contract to do so that they were breaking… and even though they’re Disney, I’m not sure they *should* have to pay royalties for Peter Pan. Copyright extension is bad even when it inconveniences people I don’t like.