Really, where are the Disney lawyers to do something about these rip offs!

[D'Snowth]

That speaks for the station, it doesn't necessarily mean their website doesn't have hidden bugs. After all, there's been many of occasions where viruses have attempted to attack my computer on such sites as deviantART.

 

[frogboy4]

That speaks for the station, it doesn't necessarily mean their website doesn't have hidden bugs. After all, there's been many of occasions where viruses have attempted to attack my computer on such sites as deviantART.

I will seldom click n deviantArt link ever. It takes so little expense and effort to set up an easy to manage personal site that even a semi-professional should have one. It shows commitment to your chosen craft to potential clients. I'd sooner pick up an anonymous doodled-on damp cocktail napkin than log on to deviantArt.

Nonetheless, I doubt that Japanese site has a virus. Sometimes overseas sites go wonky on Western computers due to something with their character system of letters.

 

[D'Snowth]

The only reason I'm on deviantART in the first place is that a few of my friends kept pestering me into setting up an account, inspite of the fact that I did set up a personal site; I mostly use DA to post "special" stuff, lol.

I doubt the character system is what screwed up the audio on my computer.

 

[frogboy4]

Eek, I don't know what would have done that. Maybe it was the evil Shmermit Kermit.

Still, I do liken surfing DeviantArt to licking doorknobs in cold and flu season. Plus they have some of the slowest loading pages on the web!

 

[D'Snowth]

It seems to me that culprit of slow loading on DA is this useless "shadow" PNG they put behind all deviations (thumbnail previews, small views, full views, etc). Other than that, no major problems, but again, some of the ads on there are fishy.

**** you Shmermit!

 

[dwmckim]

just like a person cannot get in trouble for making a parody, one cannot get in trouble for making a knock-off. The only way they *would* get in trouble is if they tried to pass it as the real thing.

Sorry, but i've got to take issue with this.

One CAN get in trouble for a knock-off.

Parody is a form of satire; one is making fun of the original work (and typically depends on the audience's knowledge of the original work to fully "get" it). While people can certainly take umbrage to whether a parody is in good taste or whether it's "lovingly done" and more of a tribute/homage as opposed to a total diss of the thing it's riffing on, satire is not (and should not be) illegal.

A knock-off is an attempt to use someone's work and ideas (one that's typically copyrighted) and pass them off as original. It's a form of plaigerism. Unlike a parody, the people doing it are hoping that audiences/buyers aren't as aware of the original so their version will be better accepted.
Now there are DEGREES of knock-offs. Any time something is new, innovative, and successful, it will inspire other artists working in that field to take something from that development and typically many projects happen that use elements of this "new direction". Twin Peaks' success led to Northern Exposure, and a few other shows who names i'm blanking out on; Simpsons led to Family Guy and a revival of prime-time or adult-oriented animated shows, you get the idea. Then you get more direct examples such as the ones that started this thread; things that truly deserve the term "knock-offs" and can't even be seriously discussed without refering to the fact that they are blatent knock-offs as opposed to following a more general trend or the latter work being "inspired" by the former. They're a thinly-veiled theft of an idea/project/property. Typically done with an intent to benefit from people's confusion of the two projects or hoping that an amount of the viewers/buyers will find it before the original.

A knock-off being passed off as the real thing (as in using the name of the original project) is a bootleg. While a bootleg is the most extreme example of a knock-off, it doesn't take away from the issues of legality/ethics concerning the type of blatent knock-off described in the above paragraph...it just takes it past one more line. Whether you've gone "all the way" into passing off your own work as an official release of someone else's or just merely coming up with something undeniably similar and just trying to confuse people into mixing them up (in essence, making a "generic" version of a "brand" work of art), both are copyright violations that one can get in severe trouble for.

 

[Drtooth]

A knock-off is an attempt to use someone's work and ideas (one that's typically copyrighted) and pass them off as original. It's a form of plaigerism. Unlike a parody, the people doing it are hoping that audiences/buyers aren't as aware of the original so their version will be better accepted.
Now there are DEGREES of knock-offs. Any time something is new, innovative, and successful, it will inspire other artists working in that field to take something from that development and typically many projects happen that use elements of this "new direction". Twin Peaks' success led to Northern Exposure, and a few other shows who names i'm blanking out on; Simpsons led to Family Guy and a revival of prime-time or adult-oriented animated shows, you get the idea. Then you get more direct examples such as the ones that started this thread; things that truly deserve the term "knock-offs" and can't even be seriously discussed without refering to the fact that they are blatent knock-offs as opposed to following a more general trend or the latter work being "inspired" by the former. They're a thinly-veiled theft of an idea/project/property. Typically done with an intent to benefit from people's confusion of the two projects or hoping that an amount of the viewers/buyers will find it before the original.

A knock-off being passed off as the real thing (as in using the name of the original project) is a bootleg. While a bootleg is the most extreme example of a knock-off, it doesn't take away from the issues of legality/ethics concerning the type of blatent knock-off described in the above paragraph...it just takes it past one more line. Whether you've gone "all the way" into passing off your own work as an official release of someone else's or just merely coming up with something undeniably similar and just trying to confuse people into mixing them up (in essence, making a "generic" version of a "brand" work of art), both are copyright violations that one can get in severe trouble for.

That's where I stand on the entire thing. While, yes, they're nothing wrong with having a similar idea and no one owns public domain stories... but these companies are willfully trying to make unlicensed ripoffs of these movies, rushing them through to get them out on time for the film's release... and if these films were released any other time, there would be no problem... but they are INTENTIONALLY trying to steal potential Disney movie viewers with low cost, poorly done videos. And I do feel that these films are akin to those shifty dollar stores (ones that aren't national chains and NOTHING actually costs a dollar) and their bootlegged "Sea Life" Chicken Little stickers, and Spaderman lead paint based toys.

I really think there is a glitch in the system. No, Disney shouldn't own The Frog Princess, the direction Up and all that... but when someone intentionally creates a knockoff to steal potential profits... well, that's what copyright was always about. And it seems to be the only thing that they AREN'T doing with it.

 

[JJandJanice]

Sorry, but i've got to take issue with this.

One CAN get in trouble for a knock-off.

Parody is a form of satire; one is making fun of the original work (and typically depends on the audience's knowledge of the original work to fully "get" it). While people can certainly take umbrage to whether a parody is in good taste or whether it's "lovingly done" and more of a tribute/homage as opposed to a total diss of the thing it's riffing on, satire is not (and should not be) illegal.

A knock-off is an attempt to use someone's work and ideas (one that's typically copyrighted) and pass them off as original. It's a form of plaigerism. Unlike a parody, the people doing it are hoping that audiences/buyers aren't as aware of the original so their version will be better accepted.
Now there are DEGREES of knock-offs. Any time something is new, innovative, and successful, it will inspire other artists working in that field to take something from that development and typically many projects happen that use elements of this "new direction". Twin Peaks' success led to Northern Exposure, and a few other shows who names i'm blanking out on; Simpsons led to Family Guy and a revival of prime-time or adult-oriented animated shows, you get the idea. Then you get more direct examples such as the ones that started this thread; things that truly deserve the term "knock-offs" and can't even be seriously discussed without refering to the fact that they are blatent knock-offs as opposed to following a more general trend or the latter work being "inspired" by the former. They're a thinly-veiled theft of an idea/project/property. Typically done with an intent to benefit from people's confusion of the two projects or hoping that an amount of the viewers/buyers will find it before the original.

A knock-off being passed off as the real thing (as in using the name of the original project) is a bootleg. While a bootleg is the most extreme example of a knock-off, it doesn't take away from the issues of legality/ethics concerning the type of blatent knock-off described in the above paragraph...it just takes it past one more line. Whether you've gone "all the way" into passing off your own work as an official release of someone else's or just merely coming up with something undeniably similar and just trying to confuse people into mixing them up (in essence, making a "generic" version of a "brand" work of art), both are copyright violations that one can get in severe trouble for.

Thank you dwmckin that's the way I wanted to put it, but it didn't come out right with me.

 

[Frogpuppeteer]

ive seen a simliar disney type knock off Before

 

[JJandJanice]

ive seen a simliar disney type knock off Before

Yeah I'm sure their are a lot more than what I've mention.

Like I said, it's a shame nothing is being done about this.