Navy Vs Disney : Othor Games

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 10:22 am

It's like having http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpPCFoXXhF0&NR=1 narrate taped books for the blind..

edit:
it was a toss up between Phillis Diller and Joan :rolleyes:

OMG, I love Joan Rivers! Truth! Truth!

» Fri Sep 17, 2010 9:03 pm

one side has elite trained warriors, the others have the best legal teams money can aqquire. its tough to say who'd win. seriously. in a fight sure the seals would win, but disney has gotten their way with this kind of stuff before.

The navy needs to hire Schlock :nod:.

I must admit I don't see the attraction. At all. They've taken so many old tales and stories and utterly ripped the magic out of them. What's really sad is that so many people now think that Disney's saccharine versions of Pooh, Peter Pan and so many others are the original creations.

They did do a decent job of [i]Beauty and the Beast[/url], though.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 7:55 am

I'm just confused about one thing. How come Disney is allowed to trademark a name of a squad that has existed for a while? And in a legal battle, wouldn't the Navy win because they've had Seal Team 6 long before those losers trademarked it?

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 4:57 am

I'm just confused about one thing. How come Disney is allowed to trademark a name of a squad that has existed for a while? And in a legal battle, wouldn't the Navy win because they've had Seal Team 6 long before those losers trademarked it?

Pretty sure the US Navy never thought they would have to fight a court battle and then copyright something that yes, they have been using for a long time because Disney wanted it...the name used for the most elite team the SEALS have.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 8:28 am

I'm just confused about one thing. How come Disney is allowed to trademark a name of a squad that has existed for a while? And in a legal battle, wouldn't the Navy win because they've had Seal Team 6 long before those losers trademarked it?

Disney has only requested a trademark. The name "Seal Team Six" has not been trademarked yet.

» Fri Sep 17, 2010 9:07 pm

If disney wins, then all they are doing is making the soldiers that helped get rid of a huge world terror a laughing stock.

Disney just made themselves a laughing stock, IMHO. Way to start a dispute over something like this. It's sort of like the President talking smack about his people without realizing he's on the air.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 7:52 am

I can't blame either of them, because I can see where both sides are coming from.

Disney wants to capitalize on a new phenomenon just like everybody else who have rushed out and gotten book deals and TV show spots and interviews and articles galore. The Navy on the other hand wants to protect and control its own image and brand name. Business as usual everywhere. :shrug:

These views are my personal opinion and are not intended to reflect those of the Navy.

Edit: On a totally unrelated note, Disney and the US Navy have worked together before. They had Disney come in and help with designing and building the http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/4287147

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 2:41 am

Well i'll have to wait for tomorrow, but I believe I just read that Disney decided to retract their claim. So they won't be pursuing the rights to trademark the Seal Team 6 license/right.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 1:54 am

Fox News... :lmao:

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:49 am

I'm just confused about one thing. How come Disney is allowed to trademark a name of a squad that has existed for a while? And in a legal battle, wouldn't the Navy win because they've had Seal Team 6 long before those losers trademarked it?

I'd imagine part of the problem is that SEAL Team 6 doesn't officially exist. Past members have come forward about the unit but it has no "official" recognition. I don't think the president ever came out and said what Team it was, just that it was the SEAL's. It is speculation that they used DEVGRU. Filing for a copyright claim would claim existence to a unit they are trying to deny.

I'm 80% sure about this, I just don't remember Obama ever saying that it was Team 6, just that it was SEAL's. I'm also fairly certain they have never been "officially" acknowledged, maybe I'm mixing them up with Delta Force.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 3:06 am

I'd imagine part of the problem is that SEAL Team 6 doesn't officially exist. Past members have come forward about the unit but it has no "official" recognition. I don't think the president ever came out and said what Team it was, just that it was the SEAL's. It is speculation that they used DEVGRU. Filing for a copyright claim would claim existence to a unit they are trying to deny.

I'm 80% sure about this, I just don't remember Obama ever saying that it was Team 6, just that it was SEAL's. I'm also fairly certain they have never been "officially" acknowledged, maybe I'm mixing them up with Delta Force.

You know, that's a good point. Was DEVGRU officially acknowledged as having performed the operation or is that a general consensus among civilians?

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 4:03 am

I'd imagine part of the problem is that SEAL Team 6 doesn't officially exist. Past members have come forward about the unit but it has no "official" recognition. I don't think the president ever came out and said what Team it was, just that it was the SEAL's. It is speculation that they used DEVGRU. Filing for a copyright claim would claim existence to a unit they are trying to deny.

I'm 80% sure about this, I just don't remember Obama ever saying that it was Team 6, just that it was SEAL's. I'm also fairly certain they have never been "officially" acknowledged, maybe I'm mixing them up with Delta Force.

SEAL Team 6 doesn't exist anymore.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 7:18 am

SEAL Team 6 doesn't exist anymore.

What do you mean?

I'm pretty sure they do exist, especially since they were the first SEAL team and the military adores traditions.

It's also possible you made a joke that went completely over my head.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 8:11 am

it doesn't matter who files for copyright first if one group is without a doubt the origin of whatever is attempted for copyright, because all your original work is technically copyrighted the instant you make it, filing for the copyright is just to prove when you made it

(edit: errr, trademarks... i think they are the same though)

A trademark is used to protect a word, symbol, device, or name that is used for the purpose of trading goods. The trademark indicates the source of goods and distinguishes them from the goods of others. A trademark may also be used to prevent others from using a mark that might be confused with another; trademarks, however, do not prevent other people or businesses from producing the same product or services under a different mark.

Quoted form http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-a-copyright-trademark-and-patent.htm

It all comes down to whether the patent office feels that granting trademarks to both U.S. Navy and Disney would cause consumer confusion, Wilentz said, in which case the patent office would give priority to the entity that filed its application first -- Disney.

And that is from the article.

I think that Disney would get the rights to the trademark, because they filed for it first.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 10:19 am

What do you mean?

I'm pretty sure they do exist, especially since they were the first SEAL team and the military adores traditions.

It's also possible you made a joke that went completely over my head.

They were apparently disbanded in 1987, then DEVGRU was created. And then the name changed again but the new name is classified so nobody knows it.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 9:03 am

but how they seem to be as monopolistic as Microsoft at times.

Wait, wat? :blink:

Both Disney AND Microsoft have competition. Their biggest being Dream Works and Apple respectively. Doing better than your competition =/= monopoly. Get it right.

I'm in shock from the ignorance of that statement. Jeeze.

Anyway, I don't see anything wrong with this, but I would give the copyright to the navy over Disney, just because it technically IS their name for a unit. Why they didn't already have the copyright for the name already puzzles me.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 8:00 am

Why would Disney even want to own those rights? ABC mini series? I mean, this is this company that passed on Back to the Future because Marty kissed his Mom.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 2:30 am

Is "SEAL" an American only thing? Or is it a generic term for cool elite terrorist terminators?

» Fri Sep 17, 2010 8:11 pm

Is "SEAL" an American only thing? Or is it a generic term for cool elite terrorist terminators?

It's for the Navy's Sea, Air and Land Teams. So yes, it's the name for those teams of US Navy specialists.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 1:02 am

I'm going to Euro Disney in a few months.. I think I'll take the ol' wind breaker along. The red/gold one with bird, ball 'n hook that yells usmc across the shoulders :evil:

ultimate defense:
Navy JAG says in court, in front of nation wide live TV: "Go ahead and use it, we've changed the name of units anyway."

Disney mouthpiece: "Ooooh, what's the new name?"

Jag, as he walks out of the court room to the camera's: "That's classified."

I don't think I would ever say that... :whistling:

And, yes I know what JAG you're talking about.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 4:02 am

Lately i've become exceedingly disgusted with Disney not only due to a fact what a relative told me about them, but how they seem to be as monopolistic as Microsoft at times.

At least microsoft makes stuff, they just don't let other companies do the same alongside them. What has Disney made in the past 10-20 years that is the least bit worthwhile? Nothing but crappy games/movies/merchandise with horrible artistic tastes.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 12:29 am

Wait, wat? :blink:

Both Disney AND Microsoft have competition. Their biggest being Dream Works and Apple respectively. Doing better than your competition =/= monopoly. Get it right.

Monopoly doesn't necessarily mean exclusivity, just enough control of the market to significantly influence it. In which case the companies in question do engage in monopolistic practices; but the point is that neither has an entirely benign influence over their respective area.

» Sat Sep 18, 2010 10:42 am

Last I read, in this morning's paper, Disney withdrew it's plans to copyright and use it.
I also agree with Nami88, Disney's behavior in this matter was unacceptable.

» Fri Sep 17, 2010 8:40 pm

of course they did. even though many have talked about disney lawer dollars, the us military would trump their lawers easily, and they would look unpopular/unpatriotic to try and challenge them.

haha microsoft as a monopoly.. that old chestnut.