Page 3 of 4
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 10:53 am
by Mr. Toad
BDF - They have not given up because there may well be some merit to the royalties part of the case. Disney and other media conglomorates have been known to significantly short pay on royalties. However, the ownership part of the claim has already been ruled on and they have lost.
What this is about is royalties on a badly written legal agreement and whether the original agreement from the 60s entitled the original owners(of which the Slesingers are the beneficiaries) to royalties on all Pooh products produced by Disney or just the ones specifically mentioned in the agreement.
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:51 pm
by Wonderlicious
ichabod wrote:Although on the other hand, maybe it's about time Disney had the Pooh rights taken off them. Myabe it'll stop them making pure crap.
I think we may share the same brain sometimes...
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 3:10 pm
by ichabod
Wonderlicious wrote:I think we may share the same brain sometimes...
Yes, but I get the brain weekends and all the Jewish holidays.
Big Disney Fan wrote:And what do you mean by that?
Exhibit A:
Exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
The case for the prosecution rests.
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 3:17 pm
by Mr. Toad
Judge Todie was unconvinced through exhibits A and B. But after viewing Pooh in a diaper the Judge finds for the prosecution.
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 3:25 pm
by ichabod
I'd ask Judge Todie to reconsider the impact of exhibit A, since Pinocchio has clearly had a sex change and is wearing a ginger wig. Also since the original actor who played Eeyore has sadly passed away, they've evidently just painted a bassett hound grey.
Although the fact that Pooh needs a diaper proves that bears really do s*** in the woods.
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 3:35 pm
by Sotiris
ichabod wrote:Although on the other hand, maybe it's about time Disney had the Pooh rights taken off them. Maybe it'll stop them making pure crap.
Tell me about it.
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 3:45 pm
by yamiiguy
ichabod wrote:
Exhibit C:
The case for the prosecution rests.
That's so cute
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:22 pm
by Sotiris
yamiiguy wrote:That's so cute.
Indeed.
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:42 pm
by PixarFan2006
ichabod wrote:
Exhibit C:
The case for the prosecution rests.
Is that a diaper on Pooh's head? I can see where that can be a problem.
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:48 pm
by PixarFan2006
Exhibit A:
Yikes!! What happened to Christopher Robin? And what is with that little dog!! Thats horrible! Just what is it from?
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 12:38 am
by ichabod
PixarFan2006 wrote:Is that a diaper on Pooh's head?
I actually think it's a condom.
Yikes!! What happened to Christopher Robin? And what is with that little dog!! Thats horrible! Just what is it from?
Why everyone's favourite new CGI Pooh show 'My friends Tigger and Pooh'!
Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:05 pm
by Big Disney Fan
ichabod wrote:PixarFan2006 wrote:Yikes!! What happened to Christopher Robin? And what is with that little dog!! Thats horrible! Just what is it from?
Why everyone's favourite new CGI Pooh show 'My friends Tigger and Pooh'!
Well, it's not the first time that Christopher Robin has not been seen in a Pooh-themed piece of media entertainment. Other Pooh things that were without CR include Welcome To Pooh Corner (from the GOOD Disney Channel), The Book of Pooh and, believe it or not, the Kingdom Hearts series (instead, we had Sora!
)
Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:40 pm
by Escapay
ichabod wrote:PixarFan2006 wrote:Is that a diaper on Pooh's head?
I actually think it's a condom.
But it's not made of trees, doesn't repeat the cover art, or have a frickin velcro flap!
(And I agree with all the "awwww!"'s from everyone. That Potty-Training Baby Pooh looks too cute to be cynically considered an over-promoted once-cherished character! It's Poo with Pooh Time!
)
Escapay
Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:07 pm
by The Little Merman
Escapay wrote:It's Poo with Pooh Time!
You nasty.
Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 9:30 pm
by Escapay
The Little Merman wrote:Escapay wrote:It's Poo with Pooh Time!
You nasty.
I aim to please, sympathize, disgust, and cause occasional-and-sometimes-violent fits of laughter...
Escapay
Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 10:18 pm
by Super Aurora
After looking at the merchandise, i just wonder how they make the money off of these......
things..
in the picture, Chris Robin look like a girl. look closely and look like a red-ish head brace in the back and some hair behind it.
As for diaper Pooh, nothing bad about it. Just a educational toy teaching little kids how to use a diaper.
Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:14 pm
by Escapay
PixarFan2006 wrote:Yikes!! What happened to Christopher Robin? And what is with that little dog!!
Super Aurora wrote:in the picture, Chris Robin look like a girl. look closely and look like a red-ish head brace in the back and some hair behind it.
The kid in the picture is not Christopher Robin. It's Darby, a little girl and a new character for the
My Friends Tigger & Pooh series. The dog is her pet, Buster.
Escapay
Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:07 am
by ichabod
You know I think Pooh is actually some sort of serpent. It seems as though he's shed his skin and it's been placed in the bath!
Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 6:57 am
by blackcauldron85
Disney Wins on Last Claims in Winnie the Pooh Copyright Suit
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... OlDS1Q4wQ8
(via disneyreport.com)
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:04 am
by blackcauldron85
Pooh Family Hits Up Disney for More Cash
Original "Winnie the Pooh" marketer wants $1 billion in royalties from Disney. Disney responds: Huh?
http://www.thewrap.com/article/pooh-hit ... -cash-9916
(via laughingplace.com)