Slashdot Mirror
Disney Asking Employees To Help Fund Copyright Lobbying (arstechnica.com)
NormalVisual writes: Disney is now asking its employees to chip in to promote the company's copyright agenda via the company's political action committee, DisneyPAC. CEO Bob Iger has sent a letter to the company's employees lauding the company's success with the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement and the recent Supreme Court decision regarding the video service Aereo -- an Internet service claiming the right to retransmit [Disney's] broadcast signals without paying copyright or retransmission consent fees. Iger also expresses the company's hope that DisneyPAC will be able to influence Congress in regards to lowering corporate tax rates. Not surprisingly, the company refuses to comment on the initiative.
get the new foreign workers to pay for it all as part of their contracts.
why on earth would employees want to fund this? it's a company issue, not an employee issue
The idea that legislation needs "funding" is odious in unto itself.
From TFA:
US corporations are allowed to solicit political contributions as long as donations aren't coerced. The relevant law bars any "threat of a detrimental job action, the threat of any other financial reprisal, or the threat of force" when asking for donations.
Also from TFA, the letter explicitly states "Your contribution is important to all of us, but I want to emphasize that all contributions are voluntary and have no impact on your job status, performance review, compensation, or employment." and "Any amount given or the decision not to give will not advantage or disadvantage you." How much of that is going to be reflected in practice -- Disney using other 'justifications' for giving a worker crappier shifts, keep them from receiving performance awards, etc. -- to create a de facto but not de jure requirement to contribute has yet to be seen
Lets just be clear, Disney's stated goal towards Copyright Law is to Subvert the U.S. Constitution and see that the clause where works eventually pass into Public Domain (a benefit the public is to receive in return for giving Copyright Protection to Authors) never actually applies.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
While a corporation should and needs to protect it's assets and petition sitting governments on various, I think it's a) inappropriate to monetarily support candidates and b) coerce employees to support and contribute to the cause. In the '80s, when I was working for IBM, they sent a letter to all (Canadian, at least) employees telling them to support NAFTA which I (and many of my coworkers) thought was inappropriate but the company felt that it was in its best interests to do this.
The situation is even more despicable when it comes to Disney, who clearly don't seem to care about their employees and really not good corporate citizens. There maybe honour & prestige working for Disney but if there is an option to reduce their costs, they will clearly take it, current employees be damned.
Mimetics Inc. Twitter
Unfortunately, no it isn't illegal. I worked at a company once that did this all of the time. It came through email in a company bulletin so I just created an Outlook rule for these emails to go to junk. The way I see it, I'm not going to read propaganda that looks and reads eerily similarly to what the Chinese Communist Party churns out. I don't want to align my personal agenda with that of my employer's because the net benefit is to my employer and not to me. I don't want to help my employer to manipulate the legal system in their favor.
From TFA:
US corporations are allowed to solicit political contributions as long as donations aren't coerced. The relevant law bars any "threat of a detrimental job action, the threat of any other financial reprisal, or the threat of force" when asking for donations.
My former employer, as US company, had us attend an event with customers, where we would be sitting at tables 8 people mixed employees and customers, and there would be a collection going around for a charity.
When I declined to contribute, things got pretty chilly at the table; people were in shock that I wasn't donating my private earnings towards a charity in order to make my employer look good.
Yeah, it wasn't political, and it wasn't direct threats, but I have never felt as shitty about a job as I did right there and then ... it was also the moment I realized I loathed that particular employer.
Did you know, Charles Perrault's family, etc. all, have not received a cent of royalties from the Disney corporation for their copying of their stories.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
When I worked for NCR, HR would go around with paycheck deduction forms to contribute to the United Way - in the name of NCR.
See, the CEO gets the credit for the donations and it boosts his reputation and networking. The United Way is just one big networking system for the CEOs.
I would throw the form into the trash.
Never give money to charities - especially national or international charities. The biggest bang for your buck is to help someone in need close to you. I would drive folks to doctors who couldn't drive themselves. And being a professional, taking time out from your schedule is a much larger sacrifice than writing a check.
I also learned how the "other half" lives and how lucky I am and grateful for all the gifts and opportunities that were handed to me. Sure I work hard, but so does everyone. But my hard work means more because I was born lucky enough to have the talents and opportunities to work in a relatively lucrative career.
Here is my ideal IP solution. All IP (patents and copyright) must state a value. Any value at all. The owner of the IP then pays intellectual property tax a some rate. If someone else really wants that IP, they can pay the owner the stated amount and the IP becomes public domain.
This solves all kinds of issues including orphaned works, patent trolls, and the likes of Disney tying up copyrighted works that should have entered the public domain decades ago. Well, maybe Disney could still tie up copyrighted works, but at least it would cost them to the benefit of tax payers.
Sadly, as right thinking as your reaction is most /. readers don't agree with your take with regard to Disney's actions here and don't have the guts to admit they don't agree. Their unprincipled obeisance to Disney's power is unlike some posters to the Ars Technica (Condé Nast) forum on this story who object publicly such as user "SmokeTest":
Power-for-power's-sake supporting /.ers will pay to see the next Star Wars movie, visit Disney theme parks, buy Disney-licensed merchandise of all kinds and thus feed the system that oppresses the world via copyright and TPP. This fight goes far beyond the term of copyright both in who is affected and specific powers multinational corporations seek to gain.
Digital Citizen
Because greed. Duh.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
My wife guilted me into doing it, but I was admittedly confused because no one else had to hold a toaster.