Disney Characters & Allowing Usage

From: ¤Cinamon¤ (Original Message) Sent: 29/07/2005 3:27 AM
Hello Ladies A good friend/member of mine posted a Good Morning Tag in my group yesterday that contained Mickey Mouse. I deleted it and let her know it was a copyright violation thinking it was a NoNo.

However, she says she has permission to use Warner Bros material on her group...

Could someone please verify this to be true? Are we in fact allowed to use Disney Characters? Of course I know they are on yours and everyone elses NoNo List and I've read their TOU'S which to me, reads as though we are not allowed to use them.

But I'd like some other verification. Has anyone here written to and asked for permission to tag the characters? Does anyone else have this letter below?

Thanks for time and have a good day
Hugs, Cinamon


Disney and Warner brother permission


1) Ladies: This is just ONE of many letters going out from companies like Warner Bros..Disney and others letting women in these forums know that the use of their images is fine as long as it is not for profit. SOOO..please be aware that all of the panic letters you see from other forum members..etc..are not legitimate. While there are a few "online" artists now kicking up a fuss about their images, the majority are not policing these groups, are not interested in "suing" housewives and others who are using the images for sig tags and extras.

So..take a deep breath, and do not worry any longer. Here is the note from a Warner Bros representative:

Thank you for your inquiry. Yes, you may utilize the characters in any such forum, as described below, provided that the characters are not used in conjunction with any inappropriate material or in conjunction with any commercial activity. I hope that this satisfies your query. Please pass this along to any other relevant members of your forum so that I do not have to respond to each member individually. Thank you for your time and consideration in contacting Warner Bros. and please advise should you require any additional information.

Marc Brandon
Warner Bros.

From: Booo© Sent: 29/07/2005 4:22 AM
You can't use them. No one can
Both are on the no lists here.

WARNER BROS - Scroll to YOUR USE OF MATERIAL: http://looneytunes.warnerbros.co.uk/terms.html
DISNEY - Scroll to RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF MATERIALS:
http://disney.go.com/corporate/legal/terms.html

luv Booo

From: ¤Jadédéd¤Génié¤ Sent: 29/07/2005 4:46 AM
Yeah i had been in a group too that was using the Disney stuff at one time, when i commented on it to the owner she too gave me almost that exact response about having permissions and such, with almost the exact same letter from Warner Bros. I dont recall the signature name on it though anymore...


I would totally hesitate from using or allowing any Disney & Warner Bro. unless someone can give an ACTUAL email showing proof of this...I don't think anyone in here has ever gotten that sort of an email.

~Genie

From: ¤Cinamon¤ Sent: 29/07/2005 4:51 AM
Thanks Boo I've read over all the copyrights so I know they aren't or shouldn't be used.

Or so I thought before reading the letter... and that is my main concern! How credible is the letter? Has anyone else written for permission and received this letter? Should I let her know it's a fake? Has anyone else ever seen it before?

Hugs, Cinamon

From: ¤Cinamon¤ Sent: 29/07/2005 4:54 AM
Thank you Genie ~ didn't see ya there!

So it's probably a letter fabricated from someone other than Marc Brandon and spread around I'll let her know!

Things that make you go hmmm.....

Thank you
Cinamon

From: Booo© Sent: 29/07/2005 5:52 AM
I've seen it before and no it's not credible
Think about it this way - they won't send out that letter and contradict themselves with their ToU The ToU are very clear and you should always follow those rather than a letter that you're not sure is genuine or not.
luv Booo

From: ©SweetHeart1 Sent: 29/07/2005 4:12 PM
HHMMM I thought i saw that thread last week but don't have time to go look.....

That letter was posted in here last year and Kim from Psp Playground looked into it for us...That letter DID NOT come from Disney or Warner....It is a Hoax.....

Raq
Owner/Manager

From: Morgaina Sent: 29/07/2005 4:30 PM
I must say, one thing that I have learned since starting PSP a little over a month ago, is that just because someone offers tubes, does not mean they have been given permission to tube or to distribute! (Naive, I know, but I guess I thought if someone took the time to tube it, they took the time to get permission......) I have learned to look up the artist and look at the artist ToU. If I don't know the artist, or if the artist name was not provided, I don't use it until I find out.

It only took making four tags (and collecting lots of tubes) with no-no artists to learn this! :)

Morgaina

From: »˚Ðög§çòú†˚« Sent: 29/07/2005 4:45 PM
actually Marc did write 'ALMOST' that letter.
they just added and subtracted a few words.
LMAO

From: ♥♥Shivers♥♥ Sent: 30/07/2005 1:57 AM
I heard of sites being sued by Disney for use of pics, not even making tags from them, just having them on their website

From: »˚Ðög§çòú†˚« Sent: 30/07/2005 3:50 AM
i once had Disney™ all over my site for a MM parody on ©
they looked
but backed off
i love the 'line'
(and IP checkers)
lol

From: ©PilgrimDude®™ Sent: 30/07/2005 7:07 AM
This "suing" issue over © issues really comes down to this:

Is a company/person/organization willing to hire a lawyer
and willing to incur the costs, if any, of pursuing the suit?

For example: say that a person put a picture of her family
on a group web site and put © on it. Say that someone else downloaded
that picture and made a tag of it or morphed it or did something
to alter it or just reposted it somewhere else. Now, the person
who originally posted the picture could hire an attorney and
threaten to sue the person who "stole" it. Would the person
who stole it have to hire an attorney? How far would both
parties be willing to go, to spend, and how willing would a judge or the legal
system be willing to pursue this? Would Small Claims Court be used?

What makes a Disney or similar company more likely to pursue legal
action is they can afford to do it. But, still, the judicial system would
ultimately have to determine if the case had enough merit to actually
go to court.

From: Booo© Sent: 30/07/2005 9:03 AM
But Dude........the fact it's possible a lot of people/companies won't go all the way with suing doesn't make it ok for taggers to take what they want and do what they want with it.
I wouldn't be amused for example if someone copied a piccy of my poochy (yep he's used in a couple of my siggies) without my consent and did whatever they felt like doing. That's just disrespectful. It's also why we're all here - to respect artists
luv Booo

From: ♣Danimkenney♣ Sent: 30/07/2005 9:09 AM
and yes they do sue.......a local company in my town had bugs bunny and other wb cartoon charactors on their company vans and I guess they didnt get permission first and were told to remove them, they didnt and yes it ended up in court. they even did the big company harrassing the little guy angle in the local papers, so they do pursue people using their images....they have to other wise they wouldnt have a company if they just let who ever use them for free.

Dani

From: ©PilgrimDude®™ Sent: 30/07/2005 9:21 AM
Booo,

I agree with you 100%. I was looking more at the reality
of it. I have had a picture of me morphed and it was sort of
funny, but it was done without my permission. It didn't bother
me, but the thought that it is bouncing around in cyberspace is
sort of different.

Dani,

I agree with you, also. And I know of similar cases. But I
was thinking more of an individual on the Net who, say, were
to post a dancing bugs bunny. It is unlikely that Disney would
go after that person, but since they have the money,
they certainly could if they chose. Now, would I have a legal
right to sue the person who mophed my pic? Maybe, but I
doubt very much, in the long run, that it would be settled
in court; and unless I got free legal help, it would not be worth it.
Also, could I prove that it harmed me in some way? So my point
is that I think it is very difficult to actually enforce © violations
unless one has the financial and legal clout to follow it all the way
through.

From: ¤Jadédéd¤Génié¤ Sent: 1/08/2005 5:38 AM
I dont know about groups, but i know for a fact that if you have a Disney tattoo and you go to Disney..They will ask where you got it from, and then hit that store legally...I know of 1 person they did that too and then the shop was sued & they closed...The person got in no trouble, but the shop made $$ off of their image...

Pilgrimdude has a great point, it all just depends on whether or not that person or company wants to go legal with it for it to be a real problem...I know for myself, i dont have the extra $$ sitting around to wait and see thats why i am all for © awareness...

~Genie

From: ©SweetHeart1 Sent: 1/08/2005 12:29 PM
I know Bill Gates is loaded but considering our groups are free i really doubt that MSN will take the chance of allowing Disney,Warner or any other with out consent and seeing as though thats never gunna happen they are off limits so why cry about it???Use stuff that you have permission for...theres plenty out there....PC Crafter,Mooseberry,Live pencil,Izabella byzemek...heaps of cute cartooney stuff......

Raq

From: MooñShadow•• Sent: 4/08/2005 1:50 AM
Disney's official website and their terms of use for the website make for some interesting reading....

http://disney.go.com/corporate/privacy/terms.html?ppLink=pp_wdig

From: ♪♥Candice♥♪ Sent: 4/08/2005 11:39 AM
So, if I understand it right... They're saying you can download images etc from their sites BUT they can't leave your pc. They can only be used for personal in-home use. They CAN NOT be used in groups or forums.

Does that sound about right?

From: MooñShadow•• Sent: 4/08/2005 5:52 PM
Hi ~ viewers can download games (is the way I read this) nothing is to be used in any shape, form, or fashion than it's intended use, sort of in other words user don't get creative and use things as to your tastes and liking ie.... graphics for tags or signatures, etc. No alternations of anything. They pretty much spell it all out in the Restrictions On Use Of Materials section, covering everything and anything at the website.

From: MooñShadow•• Sent: 12/08/2005 4:48 PM
Side thoughts on this "email"....Passing around a "e-mail" of this nature is questionable at best. When push comes to shove, full headers are required by... you guess it.... msn. As proof this document is traceable to someone within such an organization (Disney, WB, etc....) Anyone can sit down and type a letter of this up and pass it around, claiming it is the "gospel" according to Disney, Warner Brothers, etc.... when in fact it is not.

From: MrsJ23va Sent: 12/08/2005 6:01 PM
Are you serious Jude? I dont understand why they woudl do that.... think of all of the character bedroom sets they put out they know most ppl paint their childrens rooms to match...

I cant tell you how many poohs, spidermans, barbies, my little ponys etc i have painted on walls....I do this for family and friends all the time.....I suppose i will be the next...

From: MooñShadow•• Sent: 12/08/2005 6:46 PM
Disney has not only sued daycare centers but schools in the midwest of the US. The school was redistributing their works, without authorization via a copy machine.

It is entirely different when you are a licensed business vs. personal/home use.

From: InaneGlory™ Sent: 31/10/2005 3:04 PM
Looked into the Disney sueing daycare centers as it sounded like urban legend stuff & it is true. They did it over Trademarks not Copyrights & if you think about it you can see why they would do it. The daycare centers are companies & by displaying trademarked stuff on there premises they are effectively saying Disney approves of them as a Daycare center. While it might seem a little AR but Micky Mouse means Disney & the minute he means something different to the general public he's not trademarked anymore. Think about how much money Disney would lose if they allowed that to happen. Funny note is that after Disney forced the centers to remove their stuff Universal & Hanna-Barbarra gave the same centers free license to use of their characters.
Check it out here: http://www.snopes.com/disney/wdco/daycare.asp

From: ♪Hª®møñ¥♪ Sent: 1/11/2005 1:16 AM
Sorry ... nothing to do with whether WE can use Disney, or not.

Was reading the message re Disney suing a daycare centre ... reminded me of the well-known children's hospital here in England who sued, or were going to sue (can't remember if they went to court or not) Disney for copyright infringement.

From: ¤Jadédéd¤Génié¤ Sent: 1/11/2005 5:01 AM
Just don't visit Disney with that tattoo hanging out..lol

~Genie

From: CyBeR-jAn1 Sent: 5/11/2005 8:40 AM
Ummmm !

Going back to the original question .....


Hello Ladies A good friend/member of mine posted a Good Morning Tag in my group yesterday that contained Mickey Mouse. I deleted it and let her know it was a copyright violation thinking it was a NoNo.

However, she says she has permission to use Warner Bros material on her group...


' Warner bros ' she says she has permission from , micky mouse is not from warner bros !

Thought someone may have overlooked this

From: ¤Jadédéd¤Génié¤ Sent: 7/11/2005 8:33 AM
lol...

VERY good point there..But still a moot point..

Warner Brothers & Disney are off limits..


~Genie

From: CyBeR-jAn1 Sent: 8/11/2005 6:06 AM
um yes I know they are BOTH off limits

I mean to say she is saying she has permission from Warner bros yet she is posting mickey mouse image

From: ¤Jadédéd¤Génié¤ Sent: 8/11/2005 8:18 AM
I understand what you are saying hon, but I guess I am not understanding of the point or question you are asking...

Well then I guess she is confused as to whom makes Mickey...

Neither of them give permissions so you can sum it up that way to her...

Or kindly remind her that Warner Brothers does not make Mickey and then inform her that they do not give permissions...

I have yet to see anyone being able to post any sort of permissions letter from either...