This week, both our winners on the insightful side come in response to the story of Disney sucking up a third of the money raised by a school fundraiser because someone played a Lion King DVD to keep the kids occupied — and more specifically, in response to one commenter who took Disney’s side, and compared the event to holding public back-yard screenings of movies. In first place, it’s Nathan F drawing a distinction between that and what the school did:
If you are showing those movies as the actual event to draw the crowds for your fundraiser, no you can’t do that. This is a case of one of the parents bringing something to keep the kids occupied out out of the way while they were working. The showing of the movie was incidental to the actual fundraiser and the kids had no way of influencing the outcome of the fundraiser.
The parents are going to complain about this and the kids are going to hear it. Disney running roughshod over copyright laws like this causes people to ignore said laws and their kids pick up on that and do the same.
In second place, it’s Rocky with a different angle, noting that Disney still had a choice about what to do and doesn’t deserve anyone’s sympathy:
Having the law on your side doesn’t negate the fact that you can also be morally corrupt.
A company with any morals at all would have let this slide, since the fundraiser was for helping the school pay for teachers and scholarships.
What’s even worse, Disney had the stomach to go after a PTA screening of the Lion King which is a plagiarizing of Kimba, The White Lion:
Kimba is the story of a white lion cub whose father is king of the jungle. But, after his father is murdered and he is kidnapped and eventually becomes lost at sea. He, through a long journey, finds his way home only to find an evil lion name Claw, who is missing an eye and has hyena henchmen, has taken over his kingdom. They fight and Kimba eventually wins.
Disney even went after the Kimba movie Jungle Emperor Leo when the studio behind it wanted to release it in the USA. That movie started production in 1988, a tad earlier than the “original” Lion King.
All in all in regards to the Lion King and Disney, they come across as a company that has zero morals and scruples, and can in my opinion take their so called “original stories” and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine, because it’s all plagiarized in one way or another from other sources.
For editor’s choice on the insightful side, let’s round things out with a couple more responses covering other ways of looking at the situation. First, it’s an anonymous commenter noting that these are the times when you see how broken copyright law is:
Alternately, we could say that if an activity seems so innocent that people have always done it, without anyone thinking twice, maybe it was wrong to make it illegal.
And next it’s ryuugami noting what is perhaps the most curious thing about the story (and giving a shout-out to a sly Disney burn):
What I’d like to know is… how the hell did they even find out? I can’t imagine the fundraising itself being a major news story that a Disney lawyer might encounter and wonder if there’s a way to ruin it. Do they have Mouseketeers trawling social media posts for any mention of a Disney IP or what?
I did like the last quote in the CNN article:
“We would be enthusiastic about paying the license fee if Disney was willing to have their properties reassessed and pay some additional property taxes.”
Over on the funny side, our top two comments come in response to the not-so-funny but ultimately encouraging story about the court that actually refused to grant qualified immunity to a cop who shot a dog that posed no threat to him. In first place, it’s Pixelation with a real suggestion about disarming the police, wrapped in a joke:
Perhaps a big part of the problem is that we arm cops. When trouble arises, humans will respond with the tools at hand. When it happens to be a gun, well gee, isn’t that handy. If we only gave them Billy clubs, we would hear about how many dogs they clubbed to death. I think it’s time to arm our police with silly string.
In second place, it’s Berenerd who took a moment to more colorfully indulge the anger these bad-cop stories tend to elicit:
Personally, I feel he should be found guilty and chained in a pool filled with piranha and give him a bloody nose. If he survives for the 20 minute bath, he is obviously innocent.
For editor’s choice on the funny side, we start out with an anonymous commenter who proposed that the cleansing of the National Archives isn’t such a big deal:
There was never anything to see. You can check the archive if you don’t believe me.
Suggesting Disney is as bad as Maleficent reflects poorly on Maleficent.
That’s all for this week, folks!