Disney sending request for $250 after a PTA fundraiser shows a Disney movie

[DisneyOma]

I wonder if the Houston Zoo paid Disney to have an Elsa character at their Zoo Lights this year? It was a pretty obvious rip-off costume, and she was sitting on a throne, etc.

 

[barkley]

I know they are getting the rights. This is my wheelhouse, and I can guarantee you that the rights are purchased. For academic institutions, this is done by the library staff campus-wide, and is set up under the same account that is used for in-classroom film viewing. There are several companies that handle permissions processing for schools and colleges, one of the largest is Swank Motion Pictures

for academic purposes i'm sure they are doing what's correct but the standard contracts for these types of licenses are pretty clear on prohibiting admission being charged. there's a difference between a film appreciation class showing a movie vs. the same movie being offered up in the college auditorium for $5 admission. per their website swank prohibits charging an admission fee .

 

[Colleen27]

From what I understand from working with our town festival organizers, the rights issue is really easy to deal with and pretty cheap for non-profits. I think the sponsorship for the "movie in the park" was $150, most or all of which was probably the permit fee, and in exchange the sponsoring organization got to run the concession as it saw fit. I don't remember anyone talking about terms that prohibited advertising what movie would be shown, though; that seems like it would significantly impact the viability of such events because who is going to bring the family out for a movie without knowing what the movie will be?

 

[fhtpdw20]

A little off topic but I wonder what will happen to the Las Vegas "Minnie Mouse " that assaulted the security guard? I would think that is the worst negative publicity than going after showing a movie. I doubt those character costumes are licensed outside of the park.

 

[soccerdad72]

This is a tale as old as time (see what I did there? )

 

[RangerPooh]

the local universities and colleges do this all the time and you know they aren't getting any permit-and they charge for admission! it's about time a company steps up and enforces their rights.

This blanket statement isn't one size fits all. Some may, but not all. The university that I attended and later worked for paid for licensing rights to show movies. Those shown on the football stadium jumbotrons all the way down to dorm socials. The screenings were almost always free, especially the ones open to the community, but they were aired legally. Same with the church that hosted the summer movies in the park. Free screening and popcorn, but paid for the licensing rights annually.

 

[bcla]

This blanket statement isn't one size fits all. Some may, but not all. The university that I attended and later worked for paid for licensing rights to show movies. Those shown on the football stadium jumbotrons all the way down to dorm socials. The screenings were almost always free, especially the ones open to the community, but they were aired legally. Same with the church that hosted the summer movies in the park. Free screening and popcorn, but paid for the licensing rights annually.

I guess video rights are different than physical film rights. One time I saw a complete showing of the Indiana Jones (at the time) trilogy at a campus lecture hall. I'm pretty sure that the rental fees were effectively the licensing fees, although there might have been a requirement for a percentage of the gross receipts too.

The showing did have issues though. The copy of Raiders of the Lost Ark was somewhat worn and had many scenes that were cut out because previous projectionists might have taken them as souvenirs. This included some of the best scenes including the boulder scene.

 

[GoingSince1990]

If you really want to get into trouble, hold a “Disney Movie Super Bowl Party”, then the NFL will also come down on you like a ton of bricks.

 

[bcla]

If you really want to get into trouble, hold a “Disney Movie Super Bowl Party”, then the NFL will also come down on you like a ton of bricks.

It's pretty easy to tell when there's some promotion involving a company that doesn't have an arrangement with the NFL I've heard of giveaways of Super Bowl tickets/travel packages where never mentioned the Super Bowl but rather "the big game in Miami" or wherever it was that year.

 

[siren0119]

I wonder if the Houston Zoo paid Disney to have an Elsa character at their Zoo Lights this year? It was a pretty obvious rip-off costume, and she was sitting on a throne, etc.

Chances are pretty good the Princess company knows not to use the name "Elsa", the copyrights tend to include allowances for tribute, parody, etc as long as they're not specifically using the IP by name (even if the costuming is nearly identical and they are singing snippets of songs from the movies). I guarantee that the company sent a "Snow Princess" or "Ice Princess" or "Snow sisters" to the event. That's different from outright showing the movie in its entirety without paying appropriate royalties. IP is a tricky business.

 

[GoingSince1990]

Chances are pretty good the Princess company knows not to use the name "Elsa", the copyrights tend to include allowances for tribute, parody, etc as long as they're not specifically using the IP by name (even if the costuming is nearly identical and they are singing snippets of songs from the movies). I guarantee that the company sent a "Snow Princess" or "Ice Princess" or "Snow sisters" to the event. That's different from outright showing the movie in its entirety without paying appropriate royalties. IP is a tricky business.

Yep. As another example, "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" is a classic fairy tale in the public domain and owned by nobody. However, Disney owns the names of the dwarfs, so if you go to a Christmas pantomime of Snow White in the UK you will find that the dwarfs have been renamed (to take one example) Prof, Dozy, Cheeky, Grouchy, Timid, Joyful and Snotty.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

Yep. As another example, "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" is a classic fairy tale in the public domain and owned by nobody. However, Disney owns the names of the dwarfs, so if you go to a Christmas pantomime of Snow White in the UK you will find that the dwarfs have been renamed (to take one example) Prof, Dozy, Cheeky, Grouchy, Timid, Joyful and Snotty.

You mean they didn't have Sleazy, Lazy, Coward, Arrogant, Moron, Jerk, and lil hateful? I'm not going to see it. then.

 

[Heather07438]

Yep. As another example, "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" is a classic fairy tale in the public domain and owned by nobody. However, Disney owns the names of the dwarfs, so if you go to a Christmas pantomime of Snow White in the UK you will find that the dwarfs have been renamed (to take one example) Prof, Dozy, Cheeky, Grouchy, Timid, Joyful and Snotty.

Those names have a good ring to them, especially Cheeky and Snotty

 

[Heather07438]

You mean they didn't have Sleazy, Lazy, Coward, Arrogant, Moron, Jerk, and lil hateful? I'm not going to see it. then.

Your names can all be describing one person, lol. We all know 1 or 2 like this.

 

[bcla]

You mean they didn't have Sleazy, Lazy, Coward, Arrogant, Moron, Jerk, and lil hateful? I'm not going to see it. then.

There was an actual list of names where obviously most weren't chosen. Disney wasn't even the first to use names.

 

[Erzengel]

That's why I do all my fundraisers in international waters.

 

[MrsPete]

I've been a teacher for -- well, a really long time -- and ever since my first year it's been drilled into my head like an 11th commandment: THOU SHALT NOT SHOW A DISNEY MOVIE IN THINE CLASSROOM, FOR THE LIKELIHOOD OF A FINE IS STRONG, AND THE PRINCIPAL SHALL SMITE THEE.

Seriously, whether you think it's fair or not, Disney paid for the production of these movies, and they're VERY upfront about the fact that any disk you own is for your family's private entertainment only. This fundraising group rolled the dice and took their chances -- and lost. Sorry for them, but the result was entirely predictable.

 

[Erzengel]

But the difference is, the school was doing it as a fundraiser even though they weren't charging to see the movie as opposed to streaming a movie and having everyone in the class watch it.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

They are blaming Disney but according to the article it wasn't Disney going after them, it wasn't Disney contacting them. It's Movie Licensing USA who contacted them regarding the violation. Is there any confirmation that Disney is the one who scoured the internet for such information or instead that it's Movie Licensing USA who is doing it on behalf of Disney with or without Disney's actual knowledge?

The article advised the Disney, among other major film studios have a contract with Movie Licensing USA. It's entirely possible the contract allows the company to go after anyone for violation on behalf of whatever film studio automatically.

I can see it as an easy oversight on what to do but that doesn't mean they aren't technically in violation and aren't technically required to pay the fee. Just pay it and be done with it and know for the future.

The complaining party loses most of my sympathy though when they make it out like "oh woe is me we are struggling to pay our teachers and you want us to pay a fee that is in place for a good reason (in place for a good reason is my words not theirs) yadda yadda yadda" Sometimes you do things without realizing but it doesn't mean you didn't do anything wrong. Take the hit, even as frustrating it is, it's still a fairly low number all things considered and know for the future what to do.

 

[DisneyOma]

The article says PTA - so not really associated with any coverage the school system might have had, right?