View Full Version : Roy and Stanley's Website
J. Thornhill
12-07-2003, 05:22 PM
Has anyone seen this, or am I late?
www.savedisney.com
The Fabulous Disney Babe has posted it in r.a.d.p
Thoughts?
J.-
tdsryan
12-07-2003, 06:20 PM
Looks like a phony to me.
It really doesn't look very professional. Also, why would they include links to Mouseplanet and other Disney web sites?
wdwguide
12-07-2003, 06:41 PM
Registrant:
Shamrock Holdings Inc (BTMYMFKMWD)
4444 Lakeside Drive
Burbank, CA 91505
US
Domain Name: SAVEDISNEY.COM
Administrative Contact:
IT (25381446I) itservices@SHAMROCKINC.COM
IT Services
Shamrock Holdings Inc.
4444 Lakeside Drive
Burbank, CA 91505
US
999 999 9999 fax: 999 999 9999
Technical Contact:
Network Solutions, Inc. (HOST-ORG) customerservice@networksolutions.com
13200 Woodland Park Drive
Herndon, VA 20171-3025
US
1-888-642-9675 fax: 571-434-4620
Record expires on 01-Dec-2004.
Record created on 01-Dec-2003.
Database last updated on 7-Dec-2003 18:39:41 EST.
Domain servers in listed order:
DISH.LANTRXINC.COM 66.134.215.34
DISH2.LANTRXINC.COM 66.121.161.66
It's be unusual for a company to use a fake phone and fax number, so it's probably fake.
tdsryan
12-07-2003, 06:44 PM
If it's the real deal, Roy and Stan need to invest in a webmaster. It's a really poor looking site.
emmagata
12-07-2003, 09:26 PM
Link is dead.
Planogirl
12-07-2003, 10:07 PM
The site is back up. Odd...
KidDurango
12-07-2003, 10:27 PM
I sent an email to Stanley through Shamrock Holdings official website. Stan sent back a note confirming that he and Roy did indeed create the web site last week, and would like any input.
Kind of cool, I actually got an email from Stanley.:eek:
Tekneek
12-08-2003, 06:46 AM
Originally posted by tdsryan
Looks like a phony to me.
It really doesn't look very professional. Also, why would they include links to Mouseplanet and other Disney web sites?
It's real sad these days that you have to throw a lot of time or dollars into a website for it to be taken seriously. I remember when virtually all websites were text only. In fact, I remember the Internet before webpages. You know, sometimes simple is best (and besides, it saves bandwidth costs and more, which is important to consider).
WebmasterCricket
12-08-2003, 08:31 AM
It was made with "Word" so I don't doubt that one of them told someone in-house to just get something up and running ASAP seeing as shamrockinc.com was outsourced.
Form is following function as it should.
JC
deb305
12-08-2003, 08:55 AM
Its real, Shamrock is the name of their holding/investment company
Codeaddict
12-08-2003, 10:33 AM
:Pinkbounc
Don't forget the supposed (I'm inclined to believe) owner of the site is DISNEY.
It's tough to uphold a copyright of someone's last name...which makes me wonder this....what would happen if Roy started the Roy E Disney company? I'm not sure how that plays in copyright realms, so I'm looking for guidance...
meowthew2
12-08-2003, 11:17 AM
Originally posted by Codeaddict
I find it strange that they would use "Disney" in the domain. I didn't think you aren't allowed to use "Disney" in a domain name. You'd think those two would know this.
There are several unofficial sites with "Disney" in the name.
Codeaddict
12-08-2003, 11:43 AM
Originally posted by meowthew2
There are several unofficial sites with "Disney" in the name.
Yes there are, and they aren't allowed. It's a trademark issue. There have been several unofficial sites that have received cease and desist letters from Disney lawyers and had to change the domain name.
meowthew2
12-08-2003, 12:53 PM
Well, let's see, just off the top of my head, there's still...
www.justdisney.com
www.ultimatedisney.com
www.talkdisney.com
www.disneylandsource.com
www.disneyinfopage.com
www.disneysites.com
www.mgmstudios.org
www.webdisney.com
www.disneycorner.com
www.disneynews.com
Disney's legal people better get crackin' then.
Codeaddict
12-08-2003, 01:05 PM
From my understanding Disney lawyers are currently focusing on sites that sell discounted WDW tickets and have Disney in the domain. I believe also travel agencies. Next will be the fan sites. Yes they can do it. If Archie Comics can go after a guy that bought veronica.org for his 2 year old daughter, Disney can do the same.
There is a difference between cybersquatting an address (and if the gentlemen who purchased veronica.org had a valid use for it, he would have kept it*) and having the term "Disney" appear in your domain address.
*Try typing Survivor.com....you would think it would lead you to the show right? It leads you to a company named Survivor Software. They have a valid purpose for owning the domain, so they keep it...even though CBS has the term Survivor trademarked.
caseymaureen
12-08-2003, 08:38 PM
Disney is not an extremely rare name. My town has a large family with the last name Disney, I don't think it would be against the rules for them to set up a website, as long as someone else doesn't already own the actual domain name. Also, a friend of mine owns and operates disneycp.net, if you ever wanted to know anything about the College Program, check it out ;)
Watch what happens when you start clicking on any future Disney.com link, it may very well redirect and read....
WWW.EISNER.COM
No WDW visit this year, NO ABC, NO Disney video, NO Disney related purchases until Eisner resigns.
MickeyTake
12-10-2003, 02:59 PM
Originally posted by Codeaddict
Yes there are, and they aren't allowed. It's a trademark issue. There have been several unofficial sites that have received cease and desist letters from Disney lawyers and had to change the domain name.
Sorry, this is rubbish.
there is nothing to stop you registering a domain name with the word disney in it, you can set up a site with this name and use it.
If you used Disney logo's or trademarks such as the Mickey Ears then Disney could protest, but not just because your domain name is Disney-whatever.com
The cease and desist letters you refer to were for using Disney logos and copyrighted images.
You're not entirely right...
Say Disney decides to partner with Jobs on a computer venture and somewhere out there a farmer registered the name "Disney-Apples.com" because of his love for Disney and his business is selling apples.
If Disney decides they want the URL, they can sue and it's my understanding (and I reserve the right to be wrong here) that unless the farmer can show a reason for the Disney name (i.e. his farm is named Disney Apples, his last name is Disney, etc) the URL can be taken away from him and awarded to Disney.
It's too bad the professor got on a high horse because his input would have been usefull here...any other lawyers who can either confirm or deny my understanding of the cybersquatter stuff?
Dznefreek
12-10-2003, 05:54 PM
Considering it is Roy D.'s site; I thought it looked kind of "cheap".
Tekneek
12-11-2003, 02:50 AM
Originally posted by Dznefreek
Considering it is Roy D.'s site; I thought it looked kind of "cheap".
Would it be better if it was full of images, with maybe some flash animation thrown in? The Disney site goes too far in the other direction, with a load of crap that does not work across all web browsers and all operating systems. That's not efficient, or worthwhile, when you really want to reach out to all kinds of people. I suppose it definitely does not look "cheap", though.
The site serves a purpose...it will probably be prettied up as time goes on.
As Cricket said earlier, it's function before flash.
mickey1010
12-11-2003, 09:04 AM
Absolutely - function first!
Case in point - Ever wonder why Google is the most popular search engine?
There are less than 50 words on the google.com homepage and there are no images.
WDSearcher
12-11-2003, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by mickey1010
Absolutely - function first!
Case in point - Ever wonder why Google is the most popular search engine?
There are less than 50 words on the google.com homepage and there are no images.
Well ... except for the GOOGLE logo and it's ever-changing artwork (which I love).
:earsboy:
mickey1010
12-11-2003, 11:28 AM
Yeah, you got me there...but it is an image of a word. :crazy:
I love Google's creativity with their logo as well!
Here's a link to an archive of their logo artwork:
http://www.google.com/holidaylogos.html
I love the Escher!
WDSearcher
12-11-2003, 11:30 AM
I like Michaelangelo's birthday. Except that it's not exactly true to David's normal anatomically correct form!
;)
mickey1010
12-11-2003, 11:38 AM
Yeah, you got me there...but it is an image of a word. :crazy:
I love Google's creativity with their logo as well!
Here's a link to an archive of their logo artwork:
http://www.google.com/holidaylogos.html
I love the Escher!
mickey1010
12-11-2003, 11:44 AM
Sorry about the duplicate post!!
ProfGoofy
12-11-2003, 06:53 PM
Reuters article verifies Disney site:
Walt Disney's nephew, Roy Disney, abruptly resigned from the board on Nov. 30, after learning he would be forced into mandatory retirement, and began a campaign to oust Eisner.
He offered a seven-item list criticizing Eisner for issues from micromanaging to driving out talent, saying "the company has lost its focus, its creative energy, and its heritage." Roy Disney has also established Web site (http://www.savedisney.com) to focus protest.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=industryNews&storyID=3980214
Just in case nobody has noticed Roys website has made some pretty good changes recently.
And BTW I am #1109 in the petition signature list.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.