Getting sued by Disney?

[Geoff_M]

My advice, ditch the Disney artwork. At the minimum, it's a copyright violation that opens you up to legal action. Secondly, avoid naming your product in any that might lead people to think you're associated with Disney and therefore could be construed as "trading off Disney's name". I don't see a problem using textual descriptions (park names, "FastPass+", etc.) that are trademarked, but add the aforementioned disclaimers acknowledging the ownership of the marks as well as a disclaimer that you are not affiliated with Disney.

As pointed out, there are plenty of 3rd party guides that have been on the market for a long time. Open a couple up and take note on how they handle the situation.

 

[NewRVLady]

FRom what I see on ETSY, the major 'sweeps" and shut down shops are those focused on name characters-esp the Frozen ones

Also ESP the ones making replica princess dresses tagged with those Disney names

I really do not see Disney having the time to sue someone who makes planning guides

 

[lizabu]

FRom what I see on ETSY, the major 'sweeps" and shut down shops are those focused on name characters-esp the Frozen ones

Also ESP the ones making replica princess dresses tagged with those Disney names

I really do not see Disney having the time to sue someone who makes planning guides

Not just that. Planning guides and books about their parks are pretty much free advertisement.

 

[Disneyland1084]

Disney will sue over anything AND everything. When I was a teenager I was in two Disney plays Aladdin and Beauty and the Beast. The characters were all changed around and we weren't even allowed to use any of the Disney music. Pathetic!!!!!!

 

[Disneychick75]

There's some one on the Creative Disign board that Disney took to court and they can no longer use Disney designs in their work.

I also know a woman who was selling clothing at craft shows with Disney items embroidered them. Disney took her to court. They took her embroidery machine as part of the settlement.

A couple of years ago, Disney made an eBay sweep and a lot of seamstresses can no longer use Disney designs in their work.

IMO, you're taking a chance. Call it a trip planner and as Lisa Loves Pooh suggested, leave pages blank and allow the customers to write in their own parks.

 

[lacrosse_lady72]

Would it be crazy to ask Disney? Like their legal department or something. Maybe don't say you've been doing it but that you're thinking about doing it so you know either way. And if they say it's okay, get it in writing.

 

[Geoff_M]

Would it be crazy to ask Disney? Like their legal department or something. Maybe don't say you've been doing it but that you're thinking about doing it so you know either way. And if they say it's okay, get it in writing.

The only way you're going to get an official "OK" from Disney is if you want to go through the process of licensing and pay them $$$.

The best approach is to create the planning tool the RIGHT way from the start. If you don't give Disney the ammunition to sue you, odds are greatly you'll be fine.

1) Don't use Disney copyrighted materials. Before they got more comfortable with their legal footing, "The Unofficial Guide..." didn't use any photos from WDW and the only illustrations they used were originally created and looked like cartoons Disney spoofs from Matt Groening. This wasn't just because the authors wanted to be funny. If you put Disney clip-art in your planner, you're tempting Disney to "do something" about it.

2) Ensure that people understand your separation from Disney. Trademarks are used for branding. Don't tread on Disney's branding. If I create something called "Geoff's Awesome DW Planner" I should be safe, but if I opted for "The Ultimate Walt Disney World Planner" I may be "asking for it" from Disney Legal. What you need to avoid is any claim that you are "trading on Disney's name". Clearly state that you are not affiliated with Disney and acknowledge the ownership of any trademarks referenced.

Simply mentioning a Disney trademark in a descriptive manner somewhere in your product isn't a trademark violation. You don't have to use "That Theme Park Outside of Orlando With the Castle In The Center of It" instead of "The Magic Kingdom" in a planner in order to keep from being sued. What matters with trademarks (unlike copyrighted materials) is how you use them.

It's important that people understand the legal differences between copyright and trademark. A copyright holder is granted the exclusive right to control the creation of new copies of a work they hold the rights to. This is why the person mentioned above got into legal trouble for embroidering copyrighted Disney characters onto clothing. Trademark protections don't center around creations themselves... unless it can be argued that people will likely think the creation originated from Disney. If you work to negate that last part, then there's no real issue.

 

[Disneychick75]

The only way you're going to get an official "OK" from Disney is if you want to go through the process of licensing and pay them $$$.

The best approach is to create the planning tool the RIGHT way from the start. If you don't give Disney the ammunition to sue you, odds are greatly you'll be fine.

1) Don't use Disney copyrighted materials. Before they got more comfortable with their legal footing, "The Unofficial Guide..." didn't use any photos from WDW and the only illustrations they used were originally created and looked like cartoons Disney spoofs from Matt Groening. This wasn't just because the authors wanted to be funny. If you put Disney clip-art in your planner, you're tempting Disney to "do something" about it.

2) Ensure that people understand your separation from Disney. Trademarks are used for branding. Don't tread on Disney's branding. If I create something called "Geoff's Awesome DW Planner" I should be safe, but if I opted for "The Ultimate Walt Disney World Planner" I may be "asking for it" from Disney Legal. What you need to avoid is any claim that you are "trading on Disney's name". Clearly state that you are not affiliated with Disney and acknowledge the ownership of any trademarks referenced.

Simply mentioning a Disney trademark in a descriptive manner somewhere in your product isn't a trademark violation. You don't have to use "That Theme Park Outside of Orlando With the Castle In The Center of It" instead of "The Magic Kingdom" in a planner in order to keep from being sued. What matters with trademarks (unlike copyrighted materials) is how you use them.

It's important that people understand the legal differences between copyright and trademark. A copyright holder is granted the exclusive right to control the creation of new copies of a work they hold the rights to. This is why the person mentioned above got into legal trouble for embroidering copyrighted Disney characters onto clothing. Trademark protections don't center around creations themselves... unless it can be argued that people will likely think the creation originated from Disney. If you work to negate that last part, then there's no real issue.

Thanks for the clarification.

Just want to make clear that Brother is the only company licensed to sell Disney machine embroidery designs but these designs are still strictly for personal use.

 

[wdwcarla]

2) Ensure that people understand your separation from Disney. Trademarks are used for branding. Don't tread on Disney's branding. If I create something called "Geoff's Awesome DW Planner" I should be safe, but if I opted for "The Ultimate Walt Disney World Planner" I may be "asking for it" from Disney Legal. What you need to avoid is any claim that you are "trading on Disney's name". Clearly state that you are not affiliated with Disney and acknowledge the ownership of any trademarks referenced.

This is a really good idea. I use the word "Ultimate" in the title, but I might change that to "unofficial" or something similar. I wonder about all those travel agents who break all these copyright rules...

Either way, I've taken some measures just to be safe. I think I will continue it though, instead of shutting it down because it is fun to help people plan trips. Maybe I should just be a Disney travel agent.

 

[Geoff_M]

This is a really good idea. I use the word "Ultimate" in the title, but I might change that to "unofficial" or something similar.

You may also want to be careful about trademark infringement against the publisher of the "The Unofficial Guide..." series of books!

I wonder about all those travel agents who break all these copyright rules...

Well, if they're an Authorized Disney Vacation Planner Agency then they probably have been licensed by Disney to use certain artwork in junction with selling Disney vacation packages.

 

[Missy1961]

Disney will sue over anything AND everything. When I was a teenager I was in two Disney plays Aladdin and Beauty and the Beast. The characters were all changed around and we weren't even allowed to use any of the Disney music. Pathetic!!!!!!

Sorry, that's not pathetic. It's protecting the writers, etc. of the songs and the plays. Yeah, in this case it's protecting people who have made lots of money, but for creative people on the way up, it's their livelihood. It's not OK to put on a show without paying for the rights to do so.

 

[Cogswel_Cogs]

I have the opposite.

I was really nervous that one of my stories was very similar to the new Pixar movie coming out. Even though I copyrighted it in 2007 or sometime around then, I was still nervous that it was going to be an issue. I think they are still similar as in my story one of the girls emotions escapes. From the title Inside Out I still think one is going to get out, but the two approaches seem different.

 

[wilkeliza]

I have the opposite.

I was really nervous that one of my stories was very similar to the new Pixar movie coming out. Even though I copyrighted it in 2007 or sometime around then, I was still nervous that it was going to be an issue. I think they are still similar as in my story one of the girls emotions escapes. From the title Inside Out I still think one is going to get out, but the two approaches seem different.

The problem with your situation is you would have to prove that it could have been read by the creative team who made Inside Out. Fighting copyrights in works of art such as books and movies is much harder than in images because you have to prove that somehow they saw your work and ripped it off. It would need to be a published work or film not just a copyrighted idea.

 

[Maddle]

I believe they are protecting their brand, which is their right, and they are keeping control over how their images are used. The biggest reason is for profit, and another is to keep the brand from being diminished. (For instance, used on inferior products.)

As for travel agents, use of the Disney images is very controlled - but the images are available and the use is legal (under the Disney terms of use.)

Maddle

 

[Cogswel_Cogs]

The problem with your situation is you would have to prove that it could have been read by the creative team who made Inside Out. Fighting copyrights in works of art such as books and movies is much harder than in images because you have to prove that somehow they saw your work and ripped it off. It would need to be a published work or film not just a copyrighted idea.

I never intended to say it was a copy of my story. I was more concerned they were going to be similar and I was going to have hard time continuing to publish or market. But they look very different as they really personify the emotions. Though from the title I am still wondering if one gets out.

 

[shelemm]

Whether you charge money for your product is immaterial. it is very nice of you to give away something for free, (like a public performance free showing of a Frozen!), but Disney is not obligated to match your kindness. You would still need to pay the rights.

However, travel books and other guides are your own work. It all has to be your own material, and I highly doubt you will have a problem calling your travel planner any kind of unique name such as Mr. Beezleflibber's Funkalicious Guide to Walt Disney World.

Not that I am suggesting that as a good name.....