231–240 of 366 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that tweets aren't sent to Disney. They're sent to all Twitter users.
> The above legal language applies ONLY to replies to this tweet using #MayThe4th and mentioning @DisneyPlus Couldn't replying to their tweet be considered sending it to Disney?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.)
If you and I tweet back and forth agreeing that I'll sell you a sandwich for $5, that's a contract. No court is going to hear an argument that I was talking to Twitter and then Twitter was talking to you so it doesn't count. Anyone tweeting @Disney is clearly "sending it to Disney". Also I think there's a time delay on seeing the reply link on replies to your own comments.
Update 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.
I love the precedent that Disney is setting here. Will be a little harder for them to argue against my Tweet next month: "Walt Disney World was awesome! Thanks to all the hard workers who made the day special. By replying to this Tweet, Disney Corp. hereby agrees to abide by the copyright laws in place as of the release dates of its motion pictures, instead of the longer dates obtained through perversion of the legal…
Update 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.
I took this as more like when you write a letter to a magazine and they say to write "Ok to print" so they can use it later. If you send them a message for use in MayThe4th celebrations, they can then use it in promotions.
Sending a tweet to Disney with a generic hashtag can't be considered consent in any way, shape or form. What guarantee does DisneyPlus have that everyone sending them a tweet with hashtag #MayThe4th is intending that to count as consent?
It actually doesn't seem so bad on looking at it. It seems like they just want to use your tweet in some kind of collage or something and they were trying to cover their bases by claiming the right to do so. I 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.
If I understand disneytermsofuse.com correctly and I am not a lawyer, they’re claiming #MayThe4th is a Disney Product under the terms therein? Or that the Twitter account is a Disney Product? Because the terms say: > The Disney Products may ask for or allow you to communicate, submit, upload or otherwise make available text, chats, images, audio, video, contest entries or other content (“User Generated Content”), whi…
I doubt very much you can enforce a term that is a date in the year.
Update 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.
From their terms of use: "Disney DTC LLC and/or its affiliates and subsidiaries (collectively, “Disney” “we” or “us”) are pleased to provide to you certain websites, software, applications, content, products, and services (“Disney Products” and “Products”), which may be branded Disney, ABC, ESPN, Marvel, Pixar, Lucasfilm, FX, Fox Searchlight, 20th Century Fox, National Geographic, or another brand owned or licensed by Disney."
What Disney is arguing is that their Twitter account is magically a "Disney Service", and that by tweeting at them, and using a specific hashtag, you are magically using their service, which would then bind you to their terms of service.
Fuck right off. That's not how this works.
I understand what Disney wants, it wants to use other people's tweets in their own promotion materials. That is fine, provided they ask permission from the authors of said tweets. But since they're lazy fucks, they're trying to pre-emptively argue that if you use that hashtag, they already asked, and you already said ok, so they don't have to go through the hard, hard, work of actually asking people and documenting their consent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
well you do want a small chance the judge will side with you.
Although scientifically speaking, the rounding off error of your original formulation is bigger :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm curious how this works in the case of reinvention. Some algorithms are so simple that there is basically one canonical way of writing it. I'm assuming copyright doesn't cover the independent implementation in such cases?
Reinvention is ok in term of copyright. Patent would prohibit it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It really doesn't take that much corporate self awareness I think you underestimate how well anyone in management actually understands this. One job had me constantly pushing back on three or more paragraphs of legal text in the damndest of places. In one case, the legal text was larger than the form itself to say "we need your email to contact you with changes related to your account". Every time I contacted our c…
In many organizations, legal boilerplate has nothing to do with what's reasonable in the law or even what a lawyer thinks is necessary.