Disney's Anti-File Swapping Cartoon

LordXarph writes: "Newsforge has a story about Disney's anti-file swapping episode of their cartoon "Proud Family." The synopsis is simply hysterical; I'm waiting for someone to write a gnutella servent called EZ-Jackster."

Re:Oh the irony.

[SubtleNuance]

HA! Have a look at this: Nike 100% Slave Labour [adbusters.org] billboard.

Absurd isnt it...talk about gaul.

Proudly Brainwashing the Masses

[haplo21112]

Disney proudly brainwashing the masses for 6 generations.
You know, seems to be, we should be teaching people to think for themselves not shoving this crap down thier throats...I guess Disney goes no my boycott List...humm which would work if they didn't own ESPN, ABC, and like a zillion other things. Seriously though I guess its thier opinion and they have a right to express it, but its the Target audience that scares me...Kids should be watching TV that teaches them to think for themselves and make thier own choices. 'Nuff said.

Re:Maybe someone should...

[haruharaharu]

that makes sense the same way that anti-helmet law people say that sometimes not wearing a helmet saved someone's life (there are a few documented cases).

Such as me...

we all know that 99% of the sharing is people who are 1. too cheap and/or 2. too lazy to get a copy of the "item" itself.

Then explain why record sales spiked when napster came out and slumped after it got shut down.

Working on it...

[jijoel]

I'm currently taking a class so that I can start putting stuff on the local public-access TV station. I'm planning to do a lot of short blurbs, including stuff against the DMCA, the SSSCA, the extent of copyright law in general, monopoly power, and so on, for an audience of people who don't necessarily know *anything* about the issues we discuss here every day. Given another three or four months, I think I'll get quite a collection.

I'm also planning to so some pro-Linux/Free Software stuff, as well as tutorials on using some Free Software programs.

The trickiest thing is the distribution. I'd love to just put the videos on my web site, and let everyone download them (GPLed, of course, so people can share them with others), but I pay enough for bandwidth that I'm afraid one slashdotting would wipe me out. Any ideas?

Re:Maybe someone should...

[flacco]

we all know that 99% of the sharing is people who are 1. too cheap

It's too expensive

and/or 2. too lazy to get a copy of the "item" itself.

The media industry has done an incredibly pathetic job (ie non-existent) of providing "consumers" with convenient on-line music service.

Re:Last time I checked...

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

I've just reduced the value of your music to zero, because I can spread it far and wide.

That would be because the actual value of the music is zero, in plain and simple economic terms. Copyright exists -- allegedly -- to artificially raise the value from zero to enough to induce people to share their creations. As such, a very reasonable argument can be made that it is not stealing, even though infringement is illegal.

The language does matter. Copyright infringement is illegal and, generally, wrong as well. But it is not stealing, it is not theft, and it is most certainly not piracy... last time I checked, Napster didn't encourage rape and pillage on the high seas.

Re:Last time I checked...

[srvivn21]

Personally, I'd welcome the exposure. Then more people would come to my concerts, I'd sell more tickets, be able to book bigger venues. Yeah, that would really suck.

Re:Futurama?

[Bender Unit 22]

Indeed they did, but Diznee did not have Matt Groening, so of course it would have to be a lousy onesided PC story. Would not surprice me if it ended with the words ",and DON'T do drugs!".

Remember he also did The Cartridge Family [snpp.com] where Homer buys a gun to protect his family and joins NRA, driving Marge and the kids away from home whith his careless use of firearms :-)
(note that Matt is not against NRA, he is a member)
That show was not shown in some countries even though it in the end displays that the local members of the NRA in Springfield,?? are not a bunch of trigger happy dudes but cancels Homers membership.

This only shows the difference between the two series, where (in my opinion) "Proud Family" is nothing more than a money making scheme, The Simpsons has a lot more substance even though they got hit pretty bad by the PC wave.
No more will we see lines like this from Selma's Choice [snpp.com]:
-[ANTI_LAMENES_FILTER_INSTEAD OF NICE CLEAN SEPERATOR STRING HERE]-
Lisa: [reading from the pamphlet] The Duff Beer-amid contains so much
aluminum it would take five men to lift it. Twenty-two immigrant
laborers died during its construction.
Selma: Eh, there's plenty more where that came from.
-[ANTI_LAMENES_FILTER_INSTEAD OF NICE CLEAN SEPERATOR STRING HERE]-

Oh, I guess I got a bit carried away here. What I am trying to say here is that don't forget where the series are coming for and what do expect. C'mon Disney. The alltime fluffy feelgod company? The rewrote the ending of "The Little Mermaid", they would never have made true to the story of Hans Christian Andersen where she dies.

(on a totally unrelated note: everytime I sit down and try to write something serious /. craps out on me and have to wait for ages to log in again.
I have made it a habbit to cut'n'paste it before I press Submit or preview)

Re:As propoganda - funny but not worrisome

[The Milky Bar Kid]

Children, while many people who make children's programming don't realise this, are not stupid.

Disney never realized this. How many Disney short cartoons do you remember? (personally, 2 or 3).

Now how many Warner Bros. short cartoons do you remember (200, 300...). The Warner Bros. cartoons were always written so adults would find them funny - and so, kids found them funny.

Though then I remember the Warner Bros. cartoon where two mice were discussing the advantages of free-market capitalism. That was some wierd shit there.

Re:Last time I checked...

[spectecjr]

I suppose in your corporate fantasy world music and musicians did not exist prior to the creation of copyright law.

No, but they were paid by the presiding royalty of the country they were in. (This is why paychecks from music companies are called 'royalties').

Would you prefer we went back to the feudal system?

By the way, for example, Bach expected payment for his work:

"Your honor will have the goodness to excuse an old and faithful servant for taking the liberty of disturbing you with the present letter. It must be nearly four years since Your Honor favored me with a kind answer to the letter I sent you; I remember that at that time you graciously asked me to give you some news of what had happened to me, and I humbly take this opportunity of providing you with the same. You know the course of my life from my youth up until the change in my fortunes that took me to Cothen as Capellmeister. There I had a gracious Prince, who both loved and knew music, and in his service I intended to spend the rest of my life. It must happen, however, that the said Serenissimus should marry a Princess of Berenburg, and that then the impression should arise that the musical interests of the said Prince had become somewhat lukewarm, especially as the new Princess seemed to be unmusical; and it pleased God that I should be called hither to be Director Musices and Cantor at the Thomas-Schule. Though at first, indeed, it did not seem at all proper to me to change my position of Capellmeister for that of Cantor. Wherefore, then, I postponed my decision for a quarter of a year; but this post was described to me in such favorable terms that finally (particularly since my sons seemed inclined to [university] studies) I cast my lot, in the name of the Lord, and made the journey to Leipzig, took my examination, and then made the change of position. Here, by God's will, I am still in service. But since (1) I find that the post is by no means so lucrative as it had been described to me; (2) I have failed to obtain many of the fees pertaining to the office; (3) the place is very expensive; and (4) the authorities are odd and little interested in music, so that I must live amid almost continual vexation, envy, and persecution; accordingly I shall be forced, with God's help, to seek my fortune elsewhere. Should Your Honor know or find a suitable post in our city for an old and faithful servant, I beg you most humbly to put in a most gracious word of recommendation for me--I shall not fail to do my best to give satisfaction and justify your most gracious intercession in my behalf. My present post amounts to about 700 thaler, and when there are rather more funerals than usual, the fees rise in proportion; but when a healthy wind blows, they fall accordingly, as for example last year, when I lost fees that would ordinarily come in from funerals to an amount of more than 100 thaler. In Thuringia I could get along better on 400 thaler than here with twice that many, because of the excessively high cost of living."

Disney and Propaganda

[sid_vicious]

Remember that Disney has a history of propaganda - In the movie "The New Spirit" (a film commisioned from Disney during WWII), Donald Duck reminds Americans that it is their patriotic duty to pay their taxes on time [hiwaay.net] (search for "Donald Duck" - believe me, it's there).

Re:Looks like the 'giants of computing'...

[Jace of Fuse!]

Still, this just doesn't completely jive. I thought that Microsoft was a big propenent of screwing the little guy over for intellectual property rights. Thus, WMA DRM, right?

You might be partially right, but Microsoft does understand the concept of not shitting in your kitchen.

That is to say that Microsoft is comprised of geeks. While they do understand the need for copyright laws (and indeed depend on them) they also see a demand for "Pay On Demand" services that DRM could provide for us (i.e. value added services), I've never seen that Microsoft has gone out of their way to make sure that we get TOTALLY screwed, constantly, and considerably. They themselves, after all, have to use the standards they push out onto the industry. They're not just Microsoft, they're also users.

Everyone assumes that .NET and Leased Software is a Microsoft attempt to screw everyone and everybody but in reality it may not be any better or worse, may not end up costing those it effects that much more, and it may even save them time and money if they normally upgrade often enough. The truth is, most of everything that Microsoft proposes and wants done screws the pirates more than it does anybody else.

The legit users, if they think about it -- have nothing at all to complain about other than the principle it's self. I admit, the principle alone is enough to complain about, but if I had to pick badguys in the the IP battlefield, I could think of much worse enemies than Microsoft.

Microsoft just wants to curb or stop Piracy, possibly illiminate it. DRM wants to create a platform for which people can legally download copyrighted material. I'm not sure how anybody can say that either of these constitute bad things in and of themselves.

That whole monopolistic and anticompetitive thing is a different issue entirely.

I am cheap and lazy

[Bugmaster]

Cheap and lazy - that's me in a nutshell. I would only be willing to pay for music if:

1. When I buy a piece of music, I get the rights to listen to it on any set of devices I choose, and even (gasp !) whistle it while I walk down the street. I should also get the rights to give this music to my friend for his birthday.

2. I am only willing to pay for songs I want to hear. This means that I will not buy a bundle of 12 music tracks for $25 if I only intend to listen to one of them.

3. Similarly, I am not going to pay for a random song I have never heard, only to find out it sucks. I will only buy a song if I am able to preview it. I don't care about the quality of the preview.

4. I do, however, care about the quality of the actual product. If I am unable to buy the song in the bitrate of my choice, I am not moving.

5. I am fat and lazy. I would pay for the privilege of being able to download the song without moving from my chair.

6. I am also quite spiteful. I remember at all times that I am spending my hard-earned cash on pure entertainment - so my shopping experience better be pleasant. This means no popups, no ad banners, no spam. Just the song, please.

7. And yes, I am cheap. I will not pay $50 for a single song, no mater how much Sir Paid a-Lot the rapper wants me to.

In practice, many of the points above are already implemented. I can find pretty much any song I want on gnutella/morpheus networks. All the songs I find are pretty low-quality (enough for preview, though). If the kazaa client removed all the annoying ads, and added a plain old button next to each download, saying "buy this song for $xx.yy", I would click that button and buy the songs I like. Doesn't look like that button is coming any time soon, though.

Meanwhile, I stopped buying CDs, since the last 5 CDs that I bought only contained a single song that was worth listening to; and I had to spend some precious CPU cycles encoding it to MP3 so that I could listen to it. The hassle is not worth it.

Re:Disney cartoon portrays music industry as evil

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, I have a friend whose dad has about 7 albums out (he shall remain nameless for his protection from the record company that he hates). He's actually put all of his music up on Napster and other file services behind his record company's back, because they give him squat for each album he sells, and he makes much more on his live shows. And, if more people listen to his music on the web, the more people that will go to his shows.

He was telling us about how record companies suck and how they screw people. He's the one doing all of the work, and he basically sees 1% of the profits from his CD sales. Also, he told us about several other artists who are trying to screw the record companies by putting their own music up to get more fans to come to shows.

Yes, I'm posting as an AC, but I don't really want the RIAA coming after me trying to find out who my friend's dad really is. Fuck RIAA.

Disney and Propaganda

[Ramen Weasel]

Disney has a history of propaganda. In the past, it's been war propaganda in the case of World War II. Now, in the growing war between large corporations and the consumers just out for a fair deal, Disney has chosen a side. How can they justify it? Here's how old Walt justified two anti-Nazi films:

As for "DER FUEHRER'S FACE," we feel that a public character such as Donald Duck, writhing rebelliously in the clutches of the Nazis, will bring the situation home to every man, woman and child in this country as plainly as though they were witnessing the discomfiture of their own grandmothers. For Donald belongs to them like a member of their own family, and we guarantee they will end up hating Hitler twenty times more than if they had gone through the same ordeal with some curlyhaired hero who is, after all, merely another movie actor

Replace Hitler with copyright law breakers. Wouldn't it be nice if they stuck to REAL ISSUES?

I saw this..

[CobesTheGreat]

I just happened to be looking for something to watch, and believe it or not out of all 200+ channels this was all I could find. It was quite funny, maybe someone will post a divx of it on gnutella? ;-)