Earlier quoted context omitted.
why not go nuclear? "Walt Disney World was awesome! Thanks to all the hard workers who made that day special. By replying or retweeting this Tweet, Walt Disney Corp. hereby agrees in perpetuity to sell to the owner of this twitter account for $1, per motion picture, an unlimited, license for any purpose."
Why not go pandemic? > Walt Disney World was awesome! Thanks to all the hard workers who made that day special. > By retweeting or mentioning this tweet, Disney agrees to grant every natural person that likes this tweet unlimited redistribution rights and has to pay each liking twitter account 1000 EUR per month per unique click.
Disney claims anyone using a Twitter hashtag is agreeing to their terms of use
201–210 of 366 posts
Re: Disney claims anyone using a Twitter hashtag is agreeing to their terms of use
#202This is not enforceable the same way they don't get rights to any text that has "Mickey" in it. May the 4th is also World Naked Gardening Day since 2005, 6 years before Star Wars Day. There is a lot of potential for fun to be had...
Re: Disney claims anyone using a Twitter hashtag is agreeing to their terms of use
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not quite. For this to hold up, either: - everyone has to silently acquiesce to this, - Disney has to actually file a court case against everyone who violates their "terms" and win them all. I think they're trying for the first option. Suing thousands of people for stupidly unreasonable reasons is not a good look, especially for a company where image is everything.
Why would Disney have to sue anyone? The violation will come from Disney, not thousands of people. Disney is saying they have the right to use any tweet containing the hashtag, including your name (and probably profile picture). If they use your tweet and you don't like it, you can sue them for copyright violation or using your name in advertising. However, there is no way in hell you can win that suit, because it is…
Re: Disney claims anyone using a Twitter hashtag is agreeing to their terms of use
#204I think the value of hiring more experienced folks to run social media (i.e. not an intern, someone with any amount of experience) is that they can actually point out how ridiculous this will come off, and argue against this type of tweet. It really doesn't take that much corporate self awareness to see how bad it looks to try to force TOS on free speech on a public forum.
Is this idea--that major brands let interns run their social media--ever going to die? It's like a decade out of date, at least.
It's a lock that social media at Disney is led by at least one senior official and probably maps down to multiple teams--marketing, comms, customer service, research, etc.--and probably at least one outside agency. I guarantee that Disney has people with experience in social media.
From Disney's perspective, this is a positive thing for their fans because it makes it easier for the fans who want to engage with them to do so--as opposed to the usual thing for user-submitted content, which would be a "microsite" web form with similar terms and conditions.
And there is very little downside. A few grumps will performatively mock Disney on Twitter for a week or so, which happens basically whenever Disney does anything. Knowing which complaints can be ignored is a good example of the benefit of actual experience with brand social media. For example, Apple had the same terms for their Shot On iPhone campaign, which no one seems to even remember:
>1. How to Enter. To enter the Shot On iPhone Challenge (“Contest”), upload the best photograph that you’ve taken on your iPhone within the six months preceding the start of the Contest Period (defined below) (the “Photo”) and Tweet, post, email or upload it, as applicable, with the hashtag #ShotoniPhone for Twitter or Instagram and #ShotoniPhone# or the Chinese localized hashtag #⽤用iPhone拍摄# for Weibo, along with information indicating which iPhone model was used in the image caption, via one of the following methods:
>(i)Via Twitter: Log onto your Twitter account and follow the links and instructions to become a follower of Sponsor’s page on Twitter, located at @Apple, and Tweet the photo with the required hashtags and other information. You must be an active holder of a non-private Twitter account and be a follower of @Apple to be eligible to enter this Contest via Twitter (i.e., you must make sure your tweets are set to “public” and not “private”). You must have a Twitter account to enter via this method. If you do not have a Twitter account, you can create one by visiting www.twitter.com. Twitter accounts are free.
> Providing a Submission constitutes entrant’s consent to give Sponsor a royalty-free, irrevocable, non-exclusive license to use, reproduce, publish and display such Submissions in whole or in part, on a worldwide basis, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed for one year for purposes of implementing the Contest.
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/au/pdfs/passions/photography/...
Meanwhile the folks who like Disney will feed them content and data for their campaign, which is what they wanted.
Re: Disney claims anyone using a Twitter hashtag is agreeing to their terms of use
#205Update from Disney: > The above legal language applies ONLY to replies to this tweet using #MayThe4th and mentioning @DisneyPlus . These replies may appear in something special on May the 4th! https://twitter.com/disneyplus/status/1254849654585323525 ... as if that's really any better.
Somehow, to me, it's even slimier when it's a subset of posts is a targeted hijacking of an injoke made by fans for fans that predates their ownership of the property. It's not blanket maliciousness against all users, it's targeted maliciousness to steal from them.
Re: Disney claims anyone using a Twitter hashtag is agreeing to their terms of use
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reminds me of a book called "numerical recipes in C", full of algorithms that were very useful except you couldn't really use them because the authors protected their use with a very restrictive license.
Did you know that you can't use copyright to protect an algorithm?
Re: Disney claims anyone using a Twitter hashtag is agreeing to their terms of use
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that tweets aren't sent to Disney. They're sent to all Twitter users.
For some reason I don't see a reply link on lewisgodowski's comment. > Couldn't replying to their tweet be considered sending it to Disney? Disney apparently does "consider" that to be sending it to Disney. Since Twitter doesn't belong to Disney, I don't see how that could have any legal relevance. Twitter has its own terms of service. (I am not a lawyer.)
Also I think there's a time delay on seeing the reply link on replies to your own comments.
Re: Disney claims anyone using a Twitter hashtag is agreeing to their terms of use
#208Re: Disney claims anyone using a Twitter hashtag is agreeing to their terms of use
#209I think it would've been better to say "If you use this hashtag we may retweet you or feature your comment in promotional material" rather than asserting that you would agree to something by using a hashtag.
Re: Disney claims anyone using a Twitter hashtag is agreeing to their terms of use
#210Meh, they just want to use people's tweets for a starwars thing. I think they would already be allowed to per the twitter quoting rules (which I haven't read in years). The problem is the way it's worded sounds like it's coming from a legal/marketing/executive alien. Which I guess also ties into star wars.
the problem isn't just that this sounds like it was written by a legal alien, it's that they're claiming rights they don't need. The disney ToS outline all kinds of things that you aren't allowed to do, and it's obviously ridiculous to suggest that you can't include their hashtag in a tweet that violates their ToS.