# Can I sell copies of this?



## disney-fan-reborn (Apr 4, 2010)

I'm currently working on an animation for my Halloween light show, and I'm wondering if I would be able to sell copies of my work for others to use in their haunts. Here is a clip of the animation:





There's A LOT more to this song too. If you have seen the "Halloween Screams" fireworks show at Disneyland then you have seen the Oogie Boogie song I'm talking about. It's a MUCH jazzier version of the original song.

Anyway, I'm wondering if I can LEGALLY sell copies of this animation at all. I've done ALL the animation work on it myself and have spent nearly 20 hours on it so far. I DO NOT work for Disney or any animation companies. I'd offer it for $50 per copy. It would be available on DVD (+ shipping), or I can e-mail it (NO shipping).

So...Can I? And if so, I'll post a FULL ad in this section for those who are interested!


----------



## Frighteners Entertainment (Jan 24, 2006)

Highly unlikely.


----------



## Mr_Chicken (Nov 26, 2008)

You don't own the character, and you don't own the audio. This is why I share my Madame Leota video loop for free. Unfortunately, I don't think there's any legal way to sell that.


----------



## RoxyBlue (Oct 6, 2008)

I'm in agreement with Jeff and Mr Chicken.


----------



## jaege (Aug 23, 2009)

Selling the animation attached to the song would be illegal copyright infringement, and Disney is pretty tough regarding their copyrights. If you were to use completely original music/sound you could then sell it, of course. It looks pretty cool by the way.


----------



## DarkLore (Jan 25, 2009)

jaege said:


> Selling the animation attached to the song would be illegal copyright infringement, and Disney is pretty tough regarding their copyrights. If you were to use completely original music/sound you could then sell it, of course. It looks pretty cool by the way.


Maybe I'm misunderstanding this post. It seems to imply you can dub original music and sound with a copywritten character and it would be okay to sell. Which is false. The use of the character is protected. You have no right to make money from its use. (Technically, you don't have the right to use it at all, without permission.)


----------



## GothicCandle (Mar 26, 2007)

Disney is one of the(or perhaps the) biggest lovers of suing people. They sued a preschool for painting a mural of Disney characters on the playroom wall. Also, Disney has the ability to complain to youtube and ban your account simply for uploading that video. Try and sell a copy? you're talking thousands of dollars in fines, at the very least.


----------



## disney-fan-reborn (Apr 4, 2010)

Fair enough! I won't even try to sell it! I doubt I'd even go the route of sharing it. Thanks for the input everyone!

Oh, and I deleted the video from my account! You guys just freaked me out too much! LOL!


----------



## jaege (Aug 23, 2009)

DarkLore said:


> Maybe I'm misunderstanding this post. It seems to imply you can dub original music and sound with a copywritten character and it would be okay to sell. Which is false. The use of the character is protected. You have no right to make money from its use. (Technically, you don't have the right to use it at all, without permission.)


Is the graphic also from some copyrighted material? I do not recognize the character. I thought it was just a ghostly image of some sort. If the graphics are not origianl then they too, are copyrighted.


----------



## RoxyBlue (Oct 6, 2008)

The character is Oogie Boogie from Nightmare before Christmas, jaege


----------



## disney-fan-reborn (Apr 4, 2010)

Under the "Fair Use" Law, I should be able to use it for my own personal Halloween shows at my home. As long as I'm not making any money from showing it, I think I should be just fine! I'm still not going to post the original animation on my YouTube account though. I WILL, however, post a completed video of the show on my house. They can't keep that from happening...can they?


----------



## jaege (Aug 23, 2009)

For personal use, yes, you can use it. That would not be any different than wearing a home made mickey mouse t-shirt. I do not see why you could not post it on youtube either. People post movies of thier trips to Disney, and that is not illegal. I think the line gets drawn at making money on the images.

By the way, thanks for the insight Rox. I never really watched that whole movie, so am not as familiar with the chracters as many of you here.


----------



## TheOneAndOnlyKelly (May 7, 2009)

Fair use would indeed allow you to use it for your own use. However, the line is indeed drawn when money (or barter even) is involved. If you charge for your haunt, no go.

A case might even be made if you use the copyrighted character for public display that it could be in violation, but no one is going to track down people to punish for that, unless you attact enough attention.

Fair use is mostly for "private consumption".


----------



## Hauntiholik (May 17, 2006)

Since the animation cannot be sold but the discussion is valuable, I'm moving this to general props.


----------



## fritz42_male (May 5, 2009)

Just fyi, I used to work for a company that had a contract with Disney. It was with good reason that they were known internally as 'Dismal'

Everything they did was about the bottom line and they were business bullies.


----------



## walterb (Jul 27, 2010)

Disney definitely protects it's intellectual property like we all protect our children. I worked there for several years, but my experience is that the they were unbelievably focused on customer service. Of course, I was at the parks, not the movie or tv biz.


----------



## BallstonManor (Jul 31, 2008)

MacabreRob said:


> A case might even be made if you use the copyrighted character for public display that it could be in violation, but no one is going to track down people to punish for that, unless you attact enough attention.
> 
> Fair use is mostly for "private consumption".


This is the point I was going to make as well. If you played the DVD of Nightmare in your living room, that's "Fair Use". However, if you were to put the TV in the front yard for the entire neighborhood to watch, technically you would need a license to show the movie in public, even if you didn't charge. (I understand that's not what you're doing, I'm just using it as an example.)

I've found that the easiest way to avoid all the hassles is to just not use copyrighted stuff at all. Particularly with Disney.


----------



## Acid PopTart (Oct 29, 2007)

disney-fan-reborn said:


> Under the "Fair Use" Law, I should be able to use it for my own personal Halloween shows at my home. As long as I'm not making any money from showing it, I think I should be just fine! I'm still not going to post the original animation on my YouTube account though. I WILL, however, post a completed video of the show on my house. They can't keep that from happening...can they?


Like others before me, this is a really grey area.... be careful of fair use laws, private consumption is usually VERY private. Everyone thinks that copyright infringement (which is commonly defended by incorrect concepts of "fair use") only incurs if you make money from usage and that's the only way a suit can be brought. But there is something else to be considered, brand endorsement. As was the case with Disney and the day care that was using 5 foot tall Disney characters (and the fact the day care was in Orlando) the issue was that it looked that Disney was endorsing this day care. Was it a bad PR move? Most likely. Day cares hold little children, who could be mad at little kids? Universal had just dealt with a huge blow from Disney so stepped in an offered a free license to their characters. Good PR for them.

But a) day cares are still profit organizations and b) I'm guessing being in Orlando probably didn't hide it all very well.

Now the only reason I bring up this brand endorsement is because I'm currently in a lawsuit. Over copyright infringement among other things. An "artist" took my character, VooDoo Baby, actually took my photos of me as VDB and printed them out, then slapped some paint around the edges and on part of the print out, then claimed they were his original works and went to selling them on the comicon circuit. This was akin to "being in Orlando" shall we say because I work heavily in the comic industry, I model a lot for artists and so word got back to me in no time of what this guy was doing. He didn't have to sell anything for me to bring suit against him. There's a whole list of things that sadly.... and here's where I regrettably have to follow my gag order and cannot say.

So this is a particular grey area, but I think you'll be just fine for a home haunt and even showing the video on YouTube just make sure you put a disclaimer on the copyrighted stuff that you don't own it and that this in no way implies you were endorsed by Disney, etc. You are taking a chance, just know that. Technically every artist in artist's alley at a comicon could be sued for drawing Superman and selling prints, but typically the characters are so well known DC and such would see this as additional PR. But they still have the right to come by and demand a cease and desist.


----------



## DarkLore (Jan 25, 2009)

Acid PopTart - I agree with some of what you state and other things I don't. 

Agreed - you don't have to make money or profit to infringe on the
right to use. Artistic right is owned by the artist unless released. Legal terms like registered and trademark have to do with legal documentation and proof.

To use without consent is infringement plain and simple. Profit from use has more to do with damage amounts. The Internet and things like YouTube clutter the interpretations but not the law.


----------



## BallstonManor (Jul 31, 2008)

To make it all the more complicated, there is a provision in copyright law for parody. For example, Mad Magazine can make all the Mickey Mouse drawings they want, because it falls within the parody exemption.

If you can find a way to legitimately PARODY their character, you might have more wiggle room.


----------



## Acid PopTart (Oct 29, 2007)

DarkLore said:


> Acid PopTart - I agree with some of what you state and other things I don't.
> 
> Agreed - you don't have to make money or profit to infringe on the
> right to use. Artistic right is owned by the artist unless released. Legal terms like registered and trademark have to do with legal documentation and proof.
> ...


I think I must of worded something wrong (inserting a statement in parenthesis) and cluttered what I was stating. I was just stating that most people think that there's only infringement when money is made because sadly that's what most of the internet will tell you. Far too many people are quoting the law when they don't know what they are talking about (I'm not talking about anyone here - I just recently had this come up in my court case) and quite honestly when it comes to IP, it's best to get an attorney. But if you don't own the property, yeah, it's infringement if you don't have permission.

I perceive a grey area as you are _taking that chance_ to get a cease and desist (as this day care did) or receive a lawsuit in the case of Kraft versus King Velveeda for impending on their brand Velveeta which costs thousands in legal fees, which King Velveeda (Stuart Helms) lost. The court rejected his claim of parody as well.

I agree with everything you said. Apologies if I misstated something.



BallstonManor said:


> To make it all the more complicated, there is a provision in copyright law for parody. For example, Mad Magazine can make all the Mickey Mouse drawings they want, because it falls within the parody exemption.
> 
> If you can find a way to legitimately PARODY their character, you might have more wiggle room.


True.... to a certain degree. It must be altered a certain number of times. As was the case with Kraft vs. King Velveeda which I stated above and another good case would be Starbucks versus Kieron Drwyer who mimicked their mermaid circle logo but was marked "consumer whore" instead of the name Starbucks. He wasn't even given a cease and desist, he was served with a restraining order immediately.

Oh and if anyone thinks Disney is bad with pursuing trademarks and what not, in my experience nothing compares to Lucasfilms the few times I've dealt with them. And I'm even the face of Aiyvn Vel, Boba Fett's daughter! Not that I expected special treatment, it's just kind of funny all the red tape you have to go through, even when I managed a comic shop, they were very protective of their promo stuff.


----------

