Slashdot Mirror

as long as you live in a democracy the people can easily take back the power.

Not in a "democracy" where a significant chunk of people tend to vote for the candidate that the TV tells them to vote for. All major broadcast TV and cable news networks in the United States are owned by parent companies of major movie studios: CBS and UPN, ABC, NBC and MSNBC, Fox and Fox News, The WB, CNN, and Headline News, all MPAA members. Campaign contributions by five out of seven MPAA member studios are in effect offers of free advertising time, circumventing the FCC's "equal time" rule.

little timmy doesnt need to see "finding dildo" when he's trying to get "finding nemo"

But it could be argued that he does need to see an opposing viewpoint.

Will ABC run a drug ad during Friends if its a bad drug?

Given the ABC network's parent company's track record, I wouldn't rule it out.

Do you really want to be associated with ethics violations such as the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, the DMCA, sweatshop labor, and poor writing passed off as "classic" animation?

No? Then don't work for The Walt Disney Company. Work for a non-MPAA-affiliated amusement park chain such as any Cedar Fair LP park.

it must be good if the Christian fundamentalists hate it

Yes, I know that the median Slashdot user is more much more liberal than the median devout Christian. On the other hand, I've observed that Slashdot users do seem to share quite a few hatreds with devout Christians. For example devout Christians hate murder, and devout Christians hate rape. Devout Christians hate The Walt Disney Company, admittedly for different reasons than Slashdotters do.

Pixar is not an MPAA member. However, the screener ban applies to Pixar because years ago, Pixar signed an exclusive distribution deal with an MPAA member. In fact, several people are boycotting Pixar until its contract with Disney runs out.

The Finding Nemo game is already available for Game Boy Advance.

However, I'd suggest that you get a copy of Little Nemo the Dream Master for NES (90 percent less fishy than Disney's version) and run that in PocketNES instead.

I'd like to see a game for PSP based on Verne's 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.

A company that acts amorally, as all public corporations are required to do in their shareholders' interests, eventually will perform both actions that the general public regards as moral and actions that the general public regards as immoral. For example, the Walt Disney Company is only trying to increase its bottom line, but look at what happened.

If you read classics ebooks are already free

Though Project Gutenberg continues to add public domain classics to its collection, the number of public domain classics in existence is now fixed, and it will never grow as long as The Walt Disney Company continues to exist, unless you back the Eldred Act (or its equivalent outside the States).

I just checked the local library, and it in fact has a bigger collection than I had imagined. Thanks for the tip. Now I'll tell my friends to screw Disney by borrowing DVDs from the library.

This is typical of Disney, which owns 80 percent of ESPN.

That is, splicing single frames of pornography into Disney films.

Who needs single frames? Many films distributed by The Walt Disney Company are rated R by the MPAA's ratings board because they contain whole scenes of nudity. Disney's Mumford and Disney's Full Frontal are far from being the only examples.

But I'm still not buying Mr. Eisner's crap, porn or no porn.

Disney made the Bono Act and bribed the U.S. Congress into rubber-stamping it. Disney helped in lobbying for the DMCA. I don't want to support Michael Eisner any more than I have to.

In other words: I'll wait for the video and rent it, just as I am doing with Finding Nemo , and I encourage anybody who respects the public domain to do the same.

How is this any diffrent from a cable box with a built in DVR.

Because with this box, Sonny Bono owns you.

New Line is distributed by Warner, and Miramax is distributed by Disney. From the quote you gave, it appears all the MPAA distributors except for Paramount have signed onto this.

But where are the independent films? Will studios not affiliated with a Big Seven distributor be able to get movies onto this system?

And how much of a cut will Disney take? I don't want to give any more money to Disney's lobbying department than I absolutely have to, for these reasons.

American culture is incredibly rich and rewarding ... George Gerswhin

So now you're approving of the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act? Next to The Walt Disney Company, the Gershwin estate was one of the biggest forces in lobbying for the Bono Act.

When can we drop this telephone/fee system so I can just call someones IP address without a centralized service?

Now.

It's noones business what I run on top of it.

Who is this Noone fellow? Is he an elected official? Or is it like Ulysses's pseudonym "Nemo"? (in that case...)

Walter Elias Disney is dead, burned, and buried.

The Walt Disney Company will die only when Americans stop patronizing.

I know that ABC/ESPN/and probably everything else not Time/Warner is owned by them

More specifically, Disney owns what's listed here. Fox isn't included; neither are MGM, Sony, Universal, Viacom, and especially the non-MPAA studio/distributor Artisan Entertainment.

Your grain of salt for the article:

Fox is one of the four motion picture studios in the MPAA that do not share revenue with a major U.S. record label. (The others are Disney, MGM, and Paramount.) Anything that makes the RIAA look like the bad guy benefits Fox indirectly, as every dollar spent on recorded music is a dollar not spent on a Fox movie.

Imagine what the film editing and production companies could do with this.

They could make more films to sell more tickets to buy more bad laws.

rather than producing Hollywood-caliber graphics on a custom basis for each game, perhaps that function is better served by standalone companies that create characters and associated animations that game developers can license for use.

Licensing characters with animations? Movie license games are rarely[1] good games. Capcom and Virgin tried the licensed-character route in the 1990s, borrowing characters from cel-animated movies published by the company we love to hate. The games (such as Chip 'n Dale's Rescue Rangers, Aladdin, Pinocchio, The Lion King, etc) turned out way too one-dimensional to have any replay value. Or just read the reviews for Enter The Matrix.

[1] There is of course the occasional exception such as Goldeneye for Nintendo 64.

My boeuf with DisneyCo isn't with the company's support of homosexuality as much as it is with the company's lobbying to change copyright law for the worse and with its use of sweatshop labor.

Celeron=Celerity... or maybe Celebrity

More like Apium graveolens .

Efficeon=Efficient?

As another user pointed out, Efficeon sounds more like a fish. Transmeta should have plundered classic literature again (like it did with Robinson Crusoe by Daniel Defoe), possibly taking the name "Nemo" from 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea by Jules Verne. Or maybe not.

That's a compliment like saying the fat girl has a good personality.

You didn't like Shallow Hal either, I take it?

Mickey.

Mouse.

Mickey Mouse.

Disney.

The Walt Disney Company (NYSE:DIS) is a racket.

So sue me.

I'll have Finding Nemo when it comes out.

You can get a movie with Nemo right now. It's called Little Nemo: Adventures in Slumberland. No, Nemo is not a fish here.

You can get Disney's sea movie with Nemo right now. It's called 20,000 Leagues under the Sea. Nemo isn't a fish here either.

Trying to get rid of Disney? Here are options:

Try Don Bluth movies; they're better.

Try DreamWorks animated movies; they're better too.

Heck, try even the movies in Wal-Mart's $5.96 bargain bin; they often follow the original stories better than Disney adaptations do.

If your kid demands to see Nemo, try Little Nemo: Adventures in Slumberland or other dubbed anime not distributed by Buena Vista.

Good idea, but how about this: Only let the child watch a Disney movie based on a classic novel once he's read the novel. This way, he will learn how Disney writers distort the stories. That way, he won't be like "I don't get it" when he tries out A.I. and Pinocchio's Revenge, both of which refer to events in Carlo Collodi's novel that didn't appear in Disney's 1940 film adaptation.

Works out well and when he gets a good book he'll end up earning more TV time than he uses

Your child will probably see a Cingular commercial and demand that the earned minutes roll over from week to week.

And does he get credit for looking at magazines with pictures in them?

(If you don't lend me ten bucks, I can't go see "Finding Nemo")

Then you probably don't really want the ten bucks.

Yes we may be a heartless, monopolistic company

Tell me about it.

but we're not that other heartless monopolistic company who doesn't like open source.

Microsoft uses open-source software in its Services For UNIX product. Many of its userland network programs (ping, ftp, etc) are based on those from BSD. But then again, Microsoft put a provision into the license for its C library banning linking with copylefted code, even where the copylefted code's license would otherwise allow it (e.g. "operating system" exception in the GNU GPL), so I guess you're right.

We at Disney love open source.

Then why hasn't Disney released Mickey Mouse as open source? Nine out of ten copyright scholars agree that it's time for the company to move on to a new cash cow.

Copyright isn't about ideas. It's about the expression of ideas

There are also a limited number of expressions.

temporary monopoly

Temporary? Ha. Not as long as DIS is listed on NYSE.

Copyright is supposed to be about a reward system as a means to an end, the end being "to promote the progress of science and useful arts" (U.S. Const. I.8.8). The entertainment industry puppets in the USA and EU legislatures have contorted it into something else.

Finding Nemo/Sharkslayer (Something smells fishy here.)

More like...

LOSING NEMO!

To prevent further Nemo incidents, don't feed your children food that causes disturbing dreams.

Yes, to me, "Nemo" is still Little Nemo in Slumberland by Winsor McCay and not some Disney/Pixar movie.

I'm not waiting for a genetically engineered clownfish.

Grandparent wanted free software. Plan 9 doesn't count. It prohibits private modification. It requires people outside the USA to obey USA export controls. It seems to prohibit distributing some component programs without distributing the whole thing.

In addition, the license's retaliation clause effectively grants all Plan 9 contributors a license to every copyright that a user owns. For example, if an employee of The Walt Disney Company were to install Plan 9, Lucent would be allowed to hold a Disney DVD copying party. This may seem like a good thing at first, but imagine this: If an employee of the Free Software Foundation were to install Plan 9, Lucent would be able to distribute every GNU program as proprietary software.

Maybe but has any company other than Disney released Pixar (run by Steve Jobs) flix?

From the article I linked to: "as soon as February 2003, when Pixar delivers Finding Nemo and is contractually free to start negotiations on a new partnership, he'll likely be looking at a distribution deal elsewhere."

I'm holding off until it comes out on DVD.

Or when Disney stole the name "Nemo" from a comic strip.

Lose Michael Eisner. Lose the greed.

However, society decides which laws are just and unjust. You'd better get convincing society.

Unfortunately, the big copyright owners control what American society decides because American society seems to base its mores on the content of news and entertainment programs broadcast by big copyright owners. For example, I don't think ABC (a division of DisneyCo, which led lobbying for the Bono Act) would let me advertise an anti-Disney activist site such as Losing Nemo. Heck, I don't think I could even mention Eldred.cc on ABC.

what is this boycott?

Losing Nemo describes three boycotts against The Walt Disney Company: one by the church for gay-friendly policies, one by labor groups for producing merchandise in sweat^H^H^H^H^H substandard labor conditions, and one by concerned geeks for extending both the scope and duration of copyright.

Losing Nemo. Losing the greed.

This is Disney's second crack at adapting Lewis Carroll's Alice books to the big screen. The film adaptation of American McGee's Alice (in turn a video game adaption of Carroll's books) will be produced by Dimension Films, a subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company.

If you're boycotting Disney, such as if you're a Southern Baptist or you just disapprove of Disney-sponsored copyright legislation, don't see Alice.

There are exceptions to every rule, including this one.

Amazon Exec 1: "This customer buys Precious Moments figurines."
Amazon Exec 2: "They must be some middle-aged soccer mom."

I'm in the minority. I'm a 22-year-old man, fresh out of college, and I like PM figurines partly because I liked The Time Machine, a novel by H. G. Wells. (The 2002 movie wasn't even close.) I see too many parallels between the PM characters and the Eloi for it to even be funny.

Amazon Exec 2: Charge them double for new releases, and half price for Disney."

Pfft. A simple web search on the e-mail address I provided would lead them straight to my anti-Bono Act page and my anti-Finding Nemo page.

Amazon Exec 1: "What about customers who buy How to Make a Million Dollars a Second?
Amazon Exec 2: "Charge double for everything. They'll be able to afford it eventually..."

Do you imply that Amazon sells books containing offers pitched in spam? Now I remember why Amazon was once called Spamazon.

It's not a Disney movie. It's from Studio Ghibli in Japan

Monsters, Inc. is not a Disney movie. It's from Pixar. So is that Nemo movie.

Cents from every dollar you spend on tickets to see this movie are still going to the defense of bad copyright laws such as the DMCA and the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act and to lobbying for their sequels: the CBDTPA, the Broadcast Flag, the two Berman bills, and the Chastity Bono Act of 2018 that adds yet another 20 years to Mickey Mouse's copyright term.

No, but it was worth $12 at Gandi for Losing Nemo. Let's see what Disney thinks about that. It's all part of my grand plan of civil disobedience against questionably constitutional laws bought by Disney.

I don't think bad patents, especially those granted despite clear and present prior art, "promote the progress of ... useful arts" either. I'm curious how this PanIP thing will turn out.

I guess it's a repositioning of "Slashdot: News for Nerds" to "Slashdot: Stuff for People."

"Slashdot: News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." I take this to mean that all articles SHOULD match either "News for Nerds" or "Stuff that matters" or both. This article apparently matches the latter.

You may find the following pages of links interesting as well:

• More articles on Patterns
• Google Search for design patterns on Slashdot.org