Hacker News Reader

Comment by mgh2 | Hacker News Reader

Disney has also invested in Draftings and is the reason why they changed their anti gambling stance.

I am no longer a Disney fan, considering their influence on children and families

https://www.lineups.com/betting/how-disney-became-a-part-own...

Note: I can't blame them after their resorts closed due to COVID, they were pressured by investors to ramp up profit - ex: canceling stock dividends, investing heavily in Disney+ content, get into sports gambling. But being so close to children (family values), having their corporate values corrupted was a big disappointment.

View on HN

I haven't been a disney fan for a while, because their lobbyists are arguably the primary reason copyright terms have been extended to such absurd lengths: they want complete control of the mouse.

Steamboat Willie was created in 1928. It won't enter public domain until 2024 (assuming Disney isn't successful in extending copyright yet again...)

Disney raided the public domain to build it's animated films empire, then pulled up the drawbridge to the magic kingdom behind themselves.

Disney isn’t pursuing copyright extensions again, specifically because people noticed.

How does that make you feel?

"I'll believe it when I see it"

Cautiously optimistic

That their behavior is tied to people noticing what they're up to?

Isn't that true of a lot of people and companies?

Yea, just not the ones we should want to support.

Accepting that there are bad actors and actively supporting them are 2 different activities.

I am skeptical that they won't push for additional extensions, but will be happy if they don't.

Steam boat willy doesn't bring in any $$$. When one of the early classics that still sells (Bambi, snow white, etc) comes up please believe an extension is right around the corner

I agree with you that they will want an extension before Bambi, but Steamboat Willie does bring in money. When it goes public domain so does the original Micky and Minnie Mouse. In 2025 you could produce a non-Disney Micky Mouse movie.

And they do sell steamboat merch, or have in the recent past:

https://www.lego.com/en-nz/product/steamboat-willie-21317

I don't see it going into the public domain. Steamboat Willie should have entered public domain in 1956 and Disney keeps winning.

Forget mere investments, there are several Disney-property games on the App Store right now that include gambling mechanics. The sooner this stuff gets the same regulatory treatment as traditional gambling the better.

I would never allow myself to trust in a publicly traded company to uphold any values.

Does being public necessarily lead to wrong incentivizes?

It leads to only one incentive: maximize the stock price. Everything else, good and bad, flows from there.

Depends on how they do it, that is the point.

If a company chooses to rise its stock price by buybacks, shady business practices (SPACs, ads) and covering with PR, or investing in R&D to create real value.

In a world where not being evil is considered "leaving money on the table," I have little faith that there are many that don't resort to these practices.

The Values of the Carphone Warehouse: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2firijxQOo

There is the Disney brand and the Disney company. They aren't really the same thing. Disney the company owns ESPN, for example. They have TV stations, radio stations, all kinds of things which you wouldn't associate with the Disney brand. I highly doubt they intend to pollute children/families with sports betting. They intend to use it for their sports businesses like ESPN.

A company creates the brand: without company values, brand (public perception) is nothing.

Do you think upper management won’t have a say in all its brand constituents? Disney can brew an entire generation of children values with its animation movies, then upsell them when they become adults- in fact that is Disney+’s strategy. https://insidethemagic.net/2020/11/disney-plus-star-mature-c...

Your points may be valid.

I was making a different point - there is a legal entity at the top which is really just a holding company akin to Berkshire Hathaway. Inside that entity there are a number of completely different businesses. Disney (the thing humans think of when you say Disney) is one of them. ESPN is another. ABC is another. You can see an overview here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Walt_Disney_Company

Some of them broadly work together strategically. Some do not.

* this comment is at risk of offending some Disney fans

When were their corporate values not corrupted? Walt Disney was a Nazi sympathizer [1] in manners that seem a lot less family friendly than a token investment from one entertainment company into another. I agree with you that it's still not a great look for a supposedly family friendly company to do. What I question is whether it ever was very family friendly to begin with rather than simply family targeted.

[1] https://www.pastemagazine.com/politics/walt-disney/walt-the-...

I'm surprised Disney has been allowed to buy up so many media companies. They control the box office, have a major interest in sports and news, and seem to have an appetite for more.

Disney's main revenue sources: https://www.statista.com/statistics/193140/revenue-of-the-wa...

I might also add their growing influence on advertising, by leveraging these media channels https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/disney-wraps-upfront-tv-adv...

Everyone smells money on this industry and is trying to capture market share (ex: Microsoft Bing and Amazon Search). Disney might not be that different than Google after all, except for targeting a different demographic (closer to Facebook) - making it more disturbing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com