5 ms·

.

by ipsum2 7y ago

shadowgovt 7y ago
They're trying to CYA for future ad campaigns, but they can't actually CTA their way. No dice, Disney. The way this works is if you want to use the tweets shouted into the ether, you can, and if someone doesn't like it, they can sue you, and then the US (and probably international) law gets to figure out on your dime via the lawyers you will pay whether you misused the tweets. ... or, Disney does the not-lazy thing, gathers up the tweets, issues individual requests to use to every user who tweets into the hashtag, and only moves forward with the ones they get consent for. ... or, third option, Disney puts up their own website where users can submit tweets by URL, and submitting a tweet to that website (signed off by a user's Disney account) confirms the user is claiming they own copyright of the tweet and is authorizing Disney to use it. But yeah, more than zero effort on Disney's part required.
- munk-a 7y ago
  The hilarious thing to me is that folks love that sort of attention and go out of their way to get a highlighted tweet - just DMing a few dozen folks with tweets you like to see if they're willing to have their random brain farts re-posted elsewhere will get you a lot of positive responses.
- Izkata 7y ago
  They added a clarification tweet that it does indeed only apply to the replies to the original tweet.
  - shadowgovt 7y ago
    It's a good clarification of their intent, but I don't think it puts them on legal ground that's any less shaky. They'd still have to prove users had any intent at all of complying with their TOS in undertaking a public action that is only tangentially related to Disney's little slice of Twitter (hell, they'd have to prove users were aware of the TOS to even be compliant or not), and good luck with that if it ever came to court.
  - Dylan16807 7y ago
    Yeah but if you don't put that info in the original tweet, that's really a stretch. At least put 1/2 and 2/2.
abtinf 7y ago
> to reply to its account No, they don’t say that. They use ambiguous wording which could easily be construed to include any post they can see.
slg 7y ago
Maybe this is just a lazy use of language by whoever runs that account, but we are talking about TOS and legal disclaimers so I think the specificity of language matters. Disney said "By sharing your message with us..." They didn't say "By replying to us...". Every public Tweet is technically "shared with Disney" so my interpretation is they think this applies to every use of that hashtag.
_pete_ 7y ago
not even their account - it specifically refers to replies to a specific tweet & using that specific hashtag

by ipsum2 7y ago

They're trying to CYA for future ad campaigns, but they can't actually CTA their way. No dice, Disney. The way this works is if you want to use the tweets shouted into the ether, you can, and if someone doesn't like it, they can sue you, and then the US (and probably international) law gets to figure out on your dime via the lawyers you will pay whether you misused the tweets. ... or, Disney does the not-lazy thing, gathers up the tweets, issues individual requests to use to every user who tweets into the hashtag, and only moves forward with the ones they get consent for. ... or, third option, Disney puts up their own website where users can submit tweets by URL, and submitting a tweet to that website (signed off by a user's Disney account) confirms the user is claiming they own copyright of the tweet and is authorizing Disney to use it. But yeah, more than zero effort on Disney's part required.

munk-a 7y ago
The hilarious thing to me is that folks love that sort of attention and go out of their way to get a highlighted tweet - just DMing a few dozen folks with tweets you like to see if they're willing to have their random brain farts re-posted elsewhere will get you a lot of positive responses.
Izkata 7y ago
They added a clarification tweet that it does indeed only apply to the replies to the original tweet.
- shadowgovt 7y ago
  It's a good clarification of their intent, but I don't think it puts them on legal ground that's any less shaky. They'd still have to prove users had any intent at all of complying with their TOS in undertaking a public action that is only tangentially related to Disney's little slice of Twitter (hell, they'd have to prove users were aware of the TOS to even be compliant or not), and good luck with that if it ever came to court.
- Dylan16807 7y ago
  Yeah but if you don't put that info in the original tweet, that's really a stretch. At least put 1/2 and 2/2.

abtinf 7y ago

> to reply to its account No, they don’t say that. They use ambiguous wording which could easily be construed to include any post they can see.

slg 7y ago

Maybe this is just a lazy use of language by whoever runs that account, but we are talking about TOS and legal disclaimers so I think the specificity of language matters. Disney said "By sharing your message with us..." They didn't say "By replying to us...". Every public Tweet is technically "shared with Disney" so my interpretation is they think this applies to every use of that hashtag.

_pete_ 7y ago

not even their account - it specifically refers to replies to a specific tweet & using that specific hashtag