robotech_master

I just noticed I've had a letter published in Wired's "Rants & Raves" letters to the editor section. It was in response to an article about Disney propagandizing against peer-to-peer file-trading (as with Napster & Gnutella) in an episode of one of their cartoons, and I took the opportunity to point out that Disney has always taken a dim view of possible threats to their intellectual property. (I actually have had a letter published in their letter column in the past, but I can't for the life of me remember what it was about. Oh well.)

Since I don't know how long it'll be up/accessible, here's a copy-paste of the HTML source for it.

Date: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 9:41 AM
From: Chris Meadows (robotech@eyrie.org)
To: newsfeedback@wired.com
Subject: Disney's Peer-to-Peer Pressure

Your article "Disney's Peer-to-Peer Pressure" (October 24, 2001) states: "In recent months, (Disney) has taken a rather hard-line view of copyright in a digital world."
"In recent months" nothing, Disney has always been a hardliner on copyright. It may be an exaggeration, but it is something of a truism to say that you can always tell when copyright duration will be extended -- because that invariably happens whenever Steamboat Willie is about to pass into the public domain. Today, hundreds or thousands of books from the 1920s, 30s, and so on languish in limbo when they should be available freely to everyone, thanks to Disney's fear of losing copyright and trademark control over their characters.

When DVD and DivX first hit the scene, Disney was one of the biggest supporters behind DivX, a medium which allowed them substantially more control over who got to watch their movies. (As a result, they were relative latecomers to DVD -- in fact, when they licensed Miyazaki's films, including Princess Mononoke, they had to go back and renegotiate DVD rights, because Disney hadn't thought to include them in the original deal!)

Disney isn't just hardline; they're one of the driving forces behind the perpetually extensible copyright. I just hope someday people will realize what they're doing and stand up to it.

They actually cut one of the paragraphs from the original email, but I don't really mind. The missing paragraph would have come right before the last one, and goes:

And historically, Disney has always been one of the strictest litigators of unauthorized use of their characters. Remember the uproar over the daycare center that had them painted on its walls?

I think you'll agree it really doesn't lose much from that little snip.