Pittsburgh Arts, Regional Theatre, New Work, Producing, Copyright, Labor Unions,
New Products, Coping Skills, J-O-Bs...
Theatre industry news, University & School of Drama Announcements, plus occasional course support for
Carnegie Mellon School of Drama Faculty, Staff, Students, and Alumni.
www.hollywoodreporter.com: Disney might have decided not to file a legal objection to Escape From Tomorrow, a microbudget horror film whose poster features a Mickey Mouse-like blood-soaked hand. But the entertainment giant isn't ready to simply roll over on the intellectual property front, either.
I find it interesting that Disney is pursuing the show so vigorously but is dropping charges against the movie. I can very easily understand why Disney would have a major problem with their brand, including Mickey, being used in a violent way that counters their mission and company. If they are going to challenge this musical revue than they should be consistent in their prosecutions. It would be interesting to see how royalties have worked for past big-name broadway revue style productions.
What to say. So Disney is suing someone else for using their characters and to make money. I just want Disney to sue every one equally. So there may not be enough proof to sue the movie, which is totally acceptable if that is the case. The theatre just needs to do West Side story or something pay MIT there share and move forward. I realize royalties are a ton of money but every one wants to get paid, just some peoples idea of getting paid comes with a much bigger margin then others.
I understand why Disney would be angered by this show. I don't, however, understand how this show has come to be in the first place. If they are using multiple shows that are on Broadway currently, didn't they need to get permission to use the shows? How is the show able to run if they don't have permission to use the other shows? I also see Disney as being slightly out of line. (That's not the right word I'm thinking of) Disney is such a big name and people make references to it all the time. But they're not going around suing every person that makes a reference! If the show is getting sued, the movie should be sued too. Why is Disney the only one suing?! If all the broadway shows are being referenced, why aren't the other shows suing too?
To be honest, a lot of copyright lawsuits infuriate me. In Disney's case, the show itself isn't bashing any of Disney's characters. But before we talk about this, we have to ask, what is Disney trying to accomplish? Are they looking for even more money? Perhaps. Are they trying to protect their brand? Probably. Although, I think they're going a little bit too far. The people producing this show are showing "the best of Broadway" in a medley format. That happens to include shows that Disney has produced. Many people have worked to create this art, but I feel like there is so much infringement, especially with a large corporation like Disney, that if they're going to target one particular show, that they should cover all of their bases and not just pick and choose their battles. If they want to play this game, then they better be invested.
I understand why Disney would be so upset in this situation. They do have the rights to the pieces trying to be portrayed in this new production. If the company wanted to use these moments in their production, they should've contacted Disney to get permission of some kind. What doesn't help the defendants case is the fact that they are being stubborn and plan on continuing with the show instead of trying to work things out with Disney. However, Disney can be a very agitating force that is relentless. Why can't they just take a step back and realize that this piece is there to show off how great they are? I feel there is compromise somewhere in this case, yet neither side is truly attempting to fix it properly.
Personally, I feel like this is entirely understandable. I am surprised every company that owns the rights to something shown in this play is not suing. Shouldn't this play have to purchase the royalties to all the shows it refers to? All of the characters are such big names and so entirely "Disney" that it doesn't seem like anyone else deserves the right to use them without at least some sort of compensation to Disney. Also, it seems to make sense that Disney is suing them and not the horror movie. The horror movie did not use so much of so many of their characters in such a bold way. It was just a little piece of one that only somewhat resembled their character. I do agree that sometimes, well a lot of times, Disney overreacts, but in regards to this play, that is not at all the case.
Usually with copyright infringement it seems as if the big corporations are just being bullies. In this case it seems justified though. This isn't just someone making fun of Disney or using a little bit of some iconic character in a scene or two. This is a musical blatantly trying to make a profit off of Disney's success. Disney has sued over much less and I am confused how AMT thought they were going to get away with such a large shows. The complaint says that the theater seats 1500 people. This is a legitimate case of where someone is using Disney's intellectual property to make money of their own. I will be extremely surprised if that show gets to continue its run.
In my opinion it is justified for Disney to fight this show and prevent them from using their product. This a show that wants to make money off of what Disney has done in the past. This is totally unfair, in this situation of infringement it makes perfect sense. I am confused however in why Disney is suing over this situation but not over the movie that was made on Disney property? However, with Disney's power I believe this show will not get to stay on much longer.
Looking at things from afar I would want to say that it seems like if Disney is ok with their characters being parodied in a horror film then having them appear in a compilation show would be fine. It's more flattering than anything else right? If this show were to happen and it didn't include any of Disney's shows in a 'best of' compilation, it might look a bit bad for Disney right? On the other hand though, of course it's completely bad form on the side of the musical creators. Did they just do it and not ask permission? I truly wonder what goes through peoples minds. It's Disney for goodness sake! We have to worry about copyrights and trademarks on Youtube, let alone Hollywood and Broadway. Disney might overreact to things sometimes, but rightly so if their ideas and characters are just being used without permission.
This makes me even more confused about why Disney ins't suing the filmmakers! I completely understand them going after this theatre company, and I wonder if the new publicity about the "Broadway...Now & Forever" show is going to attract the attention of the companies who own the rights to the other shows begin depicted in it. Doing a small cabaret with recognizable Broadway songs is one thing, but producing a whole show that banks on the successes of another show is entirely different. From an artistic standpoint, it's actually pretty sad that this company isn't doing something more original, but instead just exploiting the fact that their audiences already know and love certain shows. I understand that every theatre company's season needs to have a money-maker or two in there, but past that, shouldn't audiences be challenged? Shouldn't they be exposed to new things? Every classic has to start somewhere. Once it has become a classic, I firmly believe that a show should be protected and produced only when the proper dues have been paid to the owners and creators of the original property.
I think what this article is trying to communicate is that Disney is very good at pick it’s battles. Although as the article points out the movie with a bloody Micky Mouse is more detrimental to the image of Micky Mouse it is much easy to change the actual character into a comic version of Micky Mouse where the audience understands the concept, yet the movie is out of copyright’s reach, than it is for a show who is using real event Disney characters. Broadway: Now & Forever has to have the actual characters in their show. Without them then there is no way the audience can draw connections to the broadway show. I have no doubt Disney know this. I believe because they do they are picking their battles in such a way that they can win and look as a powerful company where you do not want to mess with. This lawsuit is more about being a powerful and commanding company more so than the actual use of the characters. It is more important for Disney to scare possible parodies and satires and use of their characters than it is to actual stop them.
Whenever I read an article like this about Disney, I always imagine the one kid that everyone had in class in middle school who would lawyer their way out of everything. I understand why Disney is constantly suing people and they are definitely within their right to do so, but it just gets so tiresome listening to their many lawsuits. It seems like people would have learned by now to either not touch Disney with a ten foot long poll or at least work WITH them so "everybody wins." This show sounds really cool, or at the very least like it'll sell tickets, and it's a shame that Disney has to ruin it.
A lot of the people on this thread are commenting on the fact that Disney is not suing the filmmakers and is suing a theater in Pennsylvania. But I believe there is a reason. The movie "Escape from Tomorrow" is essentially a advertisement for the Disney Parks to a whole new group of people. If the movie does well and has a following, those people are gonna want to go the parks to see the locations first hand. Yes, the production company will be making money without paying dues for location fees or rights to characters, but with all the publicity and exposure, its a lot of free advertisement for Disney. IN the case of the Pennsylvania theater company, they have taken the intellectual property from the Disney Company and are making a direct profit from it without benefiting Disney in anyway. They blatantly stole the songs written for those musicals. In the case of the movie, no intellectual property was stolen. The movie was created and takes place in a real location, its like if New York Cultural Trust sued anyone who filmed an unauthorized movie in New York.
My personal opinion about art is why not let someone else make something new out of what you've made? I think that that can be an exciting way for art to be made and ideas to be spread. That said however, Disney is within their rights to sue this theatre group, these works are clearly their intelectual property. I think its unnecessary, '...Broadway Now and Forever" isn't going to be stealing away audience members from Disney's broadway productions. My biggest issue with this whole case is that '...Broadway Now and Forever" sounds like a terrible idea for a production. If a theatre company is going to put on an original musical, it should at least be an attempt at something that is actually orignal. This show just sounds kind of boring.
I'm not entirely sure how to respond to this one. Usually when it comes to Copyright issues, I have a strong opinion about to many things being copyrighted. But disney has a right to be angry and press charges. Their musical songs are original and they deserve to own the copyrights on the musical numbers (at least for the next 50 years, after that it would be nice if they added them to the public domaine). A theater company can't just take disney's numbers with out asking. I do think a lawsuit might be taking things a little to far, but disney is entirely in its rights to sue them.
As for the escape from Tomorrow land movie, I've seen the previews and I can tell you that I don't think very much of it. I almost wonder if Disney isn't reacting because they think it's beneath them (which it is). Tim also brings up a fair point about publicity. They didn't steal any intellectual property when filming and Disney may even benefit from the film. Regarding the show that stole their songs, Disney is receiving no benefits. They may be one of the largest companies in the world but stealing is still illegal.
I'm pretty sure this production would be protected from Disney because it falls under the category of parody. It is my understanding that parodies fall under the umbrella of fair use. Now, Disney may feel that they have a case because there are a disproportionate number of Disney productions being represented, but there are also a disproportionate number of Disney productions on Broadway right now. The only other case they may have against this show is whether or not they are actually "commenting" on the original work, or simply reproducing it. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out, because it has the potential to act as a precedent for how revue-type shows are considered copyrighted in the future.
This seems like a really legitimate lawsuit to me. I feel like a lot of the lawsuits nowadays are a bit picky (like the lawsuit of Apple against Samsung). However I understand why Disney would sue this show. I find it quit ridiculous that Broadway: Now & Forever would even try to use such strongly copyrighted materials. I wonder though why Disney didn't sue the movie as well. I'm guessing they had good reasons for it, probably something to do with copyright laws.
I personally think that Disney is rightful in their stance to sue the company that is making this 'Review'. I think that it is a nice gesture from the company in that they are supposedly representing and honoring some of the 'greatest moments in theatrical history'. However, I definitely think that the company needs to buy the rights from Disney if they are going to utilize themes or characters from them.
18 comments:
I find it interesting that Disney is pursuing the show so vigorously but is dropping charges against the movie. I can very easily understand why Disney would have a major problem with their brand, including Mickey, being used in a violent way that counters their mission and company. If they are going to challenge this musical revue than they should be consistent in their prosecutions. It would be interesting to see how royalties have worked for past big-name broadway revue style productions.
What to say. So Disney is suing someone else for using their characters and to make money. I just want Disney to sue every one equally. So there may not be enough proof to sue the movie, which is totally acceptable if that is the case. The theatre just needs to do West Side story or something pay MIT there share and move forward. I realize royalties are a ton of money but every one wants to get paid, just some peoples idea of getting paid comes with a much bigger margin then others.
I understand why Disney would be angered by this show. I don't, however, understand how this show has come to be in the first place. If they are using multiple shows that are on Broadway currently, didn't they need to get permission to use the shows? How is the show able to run if they don't have permission to use the other shows? I also see Disney as being slightly out of line. (That's not the right word I'm thinking of) Disney is such a big name and people make references to it all the time. But they're not going around suing every person that makes a reference! If the show is getting sued, the movie should be sued too. Why is Disney the only one suing?! If all the broadway shows are being referenced, why aren't the other shows suing too?
To be honest, a lot of copyright lawsuits infuriate me. In Disney's case, the show itself isn't bashing any of Disney's characters. But before we talk about this, we have to ask, what is Disney trying to accomplish? Are they looking for even more money? Perhaps. Are they trying to protect their brand? Probably. Although, I think they're going a little bit too far. The people producing this show are showing "the best of Broadway" in a medley format. That happens to include shows that Disney has produced. Many people have worked to create this art, but I feel like there is so much infringement, especially with a large corporation like Disney, that if they're going to target one particular show, that they should cover all of their bases and not just pick and choose their battles. If they want to play this game, then they better be invested.
I understand why Disney would be so upset in this situation. They do have the rights to the pieces trying to be portrayed in this new production. If the company wanted to use these moments in their production, they should've contacted Disney to get permission of some kind. What doesn't help the defendants case is the fact that they are being stubborn and plan on continuing with the show instead of trying to work things out with Disney. However, Disney can be a very agitating force that is relentless. Why can't they just take a step back and realize that this piece is there to show off how great they are? I feel there is compromise somewhere in this case, yet neither side is truly attempting to fix it properly.
Personally, I feel like this is entirely understandable. I am surprised every company that owns the rights to something shown in this play is not suing. Shouldn't this play have to purchase the royalties to all the shows it refers to? All of the characters are such big names and so entirely "Disney" that it doesn't seem like anyone else deserves the right to use them without at least some sort of compensation to Disney. Also, it seems to make sense that Disney is suing them and not the horror movie. The horror movie did not use so much of so many of their characters in such a bold way. It was just a little piece of one that only somewhat resembled their character. I do agree that sometimes, well a lot of times, Disney overreacts, but in regards to this play, that is not at all the case.
Usually with copyright infringement it seems as if the big corporations are just being bullies. In this case it seems justified though. This isn't just someone making fun of Disney or using a little bit of some iconic character in a scene or two. This is a musical blatantly trying to make a profit off of Disney's success. Disney has sued over much less and I am confused how AMT thought they were going to get away with such a large shows. The complaint says that the theater seats 1500 people. This is a legitimate case of where someone is using Disney's intellectual property to make money of their own. I will be extremely surprised if that show gets to continue its run.
In my opinion it is justified for Disney to fight this show and prevent them from using their product. This a show that wants to make money off of what Disney has done in the past. This is totally unfair, in this situation of infringement it makes perfect sense. I am confused however in why Disney is suing over this situation but not over the movie that was made on Disney property? However, with Disney's power I believe this show will not get to stay on much longer.
Looking at things from afar I would want to say that it seems like if Disney is ok with their characters being parodied in a horror film then having them appear in a compilation show would be fine. It's more flattering than anything else right? If this show were to happen and it didn't include any of Disney's shows in a 'best of' compilation, it might look a bit bad for Disney right? On the other hand though, of course it's completely bad form on the side of the musical creators. Did they just do it and not ask permission? I truly wonder what goes through peoples minds. It's Disney for goodness sake! We have to worry about copyrights and trademarks on Youtube, let alone Hollywood and Broadway. Disney might overreact to things sometimes, but rightly so if their ideas and characters are just being used without permission.
This makes me even more confused about why Disney ins't suing the filmmakers! I completely understand them going after this theatre company, and I wonder if the new publicity about the "Broadway...Now & Forever" show is going to attract the attention of the companies who own the rights to the other shows begin depicted in it. Doing a small cabaret with recognizable Broadway songs is one thing, but producing a whole show that banks on the successes of another show is entirely different. From an artistic standpoint, it's actually pretty sad that this company isn't doing something more original, but instead just exploiting the fact that their audiences already know and love certain shows. I understand that every theatre company's season needs to have a money-maker or two in there, but past that, shouldn't audiences be challenged? Shouldn't they be exposed to new things? Every classic has to start somewhere. Once it has become a classic, I firmly believe that a show should be protected and produced only when the proper dues have been paid to the owners and creators of the original property.
I think what this article is trying to communicate is that Disney is very good at pick it’s battles. Although as the article points out the movie with a bloody Micky Mouse is more detrimental to the image of Micky Mouse it is much easy to change the actual character into a comic version of Micky Mouse where the audience understands the concept, yet the movie is out of copyright’s reach, than it is for a show who is using real event Disney characters. Broadway: Now & Forever has to have the actual characters in their show. Without them then there is no way the audience can draw connections to the broadway show. I have no doubt Disney know this. I believe because they do they are picking their battles in such a way that they can win and look as a powerful company where you do not want to mess with. This lawsuit is more about being a powerful and commanding company more so than the actual use of the characters. It is more important for Disney to scare possible parodies and satires and use of their characters than it is to actual stop them.
Whenever I read an article like this about Disney, I always imagine the one kid that everyone had in class in middle school who would lawyer their way out of everything. I understand why Disney is constantly suing people and they are definitely within their right to do so, but it just gets so tiresome listening to their many lawsuits. It seems like people would have learned by now to either not touch Disney with a ten foot long poll or at least work WITH them so "everybody wins." This show sounds really cool, or at the very least like it'll sell tickets, and it's a shame that Disney has to ruin it.
A lot of the people on this thread are commenting on the fact that Disney is not suing the filmmakers and is suing a theater in Pennsylvania. But I believe there is a reason. The movie "Escape from Tomorrow" is essentially a advertisement for the Disney Parks to a whole new group of people. If the movie does well and has a following, those people are gonna want to go the parks to see the locations first hand. Yes, the production company will be making money without paying dues for location fees or rights to characters, but with all the publicity and exposure, its a lot of free advertisement for Disney. IN the case of the Pennsylvania theater company, they have taken the intellectual property from the Disney Company and are making a direct profit from it without benefiting Disney in anyway. They blatantly stole the songs written for those musicals. In the case of the movie, no intellectual property was stolen. The movie was created and takes place in a real location, its like if New York Cultural Trust sued anyone who filmed an unauthorized movie in New York.
My personal opinion about art is why not let someone else make something new out of what you've made? I think that that can be an exciting way for art to be made and ideas to be spread. That said however, Disney is within their rights to sue this theatre group, these works are clearly their intelectual property. I think its unnecessary, '...Broadway Now and Forever" isn't going to be stealing away audience members from Disney's broadway productions. My biggest issue with this whole case is that '...Broadway Now and Forever" sounds like a terrible idea for a production. If a theatre company is going to put on an original musical, it should at least be an attempt at something that is actually orignal. This show just sounds kind of boring.
I'm not entirely sure how to respond to this one. Usually when it comes to Copyright issues, I have a strong opinion about to many things being copyrighted. But disney has a right to be angry and press charges. Their musical songs are original and they deserve to own the copyrights on the musical numbers (at least for the next 50 years, after that it would be nice if they added them to the public domaine). A theater company can't just take disney's numbers with out asking. I do think a lawsuit might be taking things a little to far, but disney is entirely in its rights to sue them.
As for the escape from Tomorrow land movie, I've seen the previews and I can tell you that I don't think very much of it. I almost wonder if Disney isn't reacting because they think it's beneath them (which it is). Tim also brings up a fair point about publicity. They didn't steal any intellectual property when filming and Disney may even benefit from the film. Regarding the show that stole their songs, Disney is receiving no benefits. They may be one of the largest companies in the world but stealing is still illegal.
I'm pretty sure this production would be protected from Disney because it falls under the category of parody. It is my understanding that parodies fall under the umbrella of fair use. Now, Disney may feel that they have a case because there are a disproportionate number of Disney productions being represented, but there are also a disproportionate number of Disney productions on Broadway right now. The only other case they may have against this show is whether or not they are actually "commenting" on the original work, or simply reproducing it. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out, because it has the potential to act as a precedent for how revue-type shows are considered copyrighted in the future.
This seems like a really legitimate lawsuit to me.
I feel like a lot of the lawsuits nowadays are a bit picky (like the lawsuit of Apple against Samsung).
However I understand why Disney would sue this show. I find it quit ridiculous that Broadway: Now & Forever would even try to use such strongly copyrighted materials.
I wonder though why Disney didn't sue the movie as well. I'm guessing they had good reasons for it, probably something to do with copyright laws.
I personally think that Disney is rightful in their stance to sue the company that is making this 'Review'. I think that it is a nice gesture from the company in that they are supposedly representing and honoring some of the 'greatest moments in theatrical history'. However, I definitely think that the company needs to buy the rights from Disney if they are going to utilize themes or characters from them.
Post a Comment