Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Unauthorized State-Owned Chinese Disneyland

CowboyNeal posted more than 7 years ago | from the just-like-the-real-thing dept.

Media 746

rmnoon writes "Apparently Japanese TV and bloggers have just discovered Disney's theme park in China, where young children can be part of the Magic Kingdom and interact with their favorite characters (like Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, and the Seven Dwarfs). The park's slogan is 'Because Disneyland is Too Far,' and there's even an Epcot-like dome. The only problem? Disney didn't build it, and they didn't authorize it. What's more? It's state-owned!"

cancel ×

746 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

*smack*! (5, Funny)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983835)

Take that Eisner!

Re:*smack*! (3, Interesting)

OECD (639690) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983925)

Take that Eisner!

Yeah, funny, but the copyright maximalists have just gotten another arrow in their quiver.

Re:*smack*! (2, Insightful)

EvanED (569694) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984005)

Copyright AND trademark.

I'm all for weaker copyright laws (though not to the extent of some people here), but this is WAY too far IMO.

Re:*smack*! (2, Funny)

creimer (824291) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984009)

Yes, but it's a good thing that their target isn't Far Far Away. :P

Re:*smack*! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18984121)

Don't you mean Bob Iger?

Oh and Steve Jobs, he's the largest share holder in Disney now (I believe).

This park have been in existence since the 80's... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18984205)

Yes. But I guess having trade marked Disney characters is still infringing on trade marks.

 

I'm confused (5, Funny)

Itchyeyes (908311) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984231)

I don't know what to do when standard anti-socialism and anti-IP /. dogma clash. Who's side are we supposed to be on on this one.

Re:I'm confused (4, Insightful)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984349)

Who's side are we supposed to be on on this one.

China hasn't been socialist since their 1978 reforms. Disney hasn't been capitalist (in the sense of participating in a free market economy) since they bought the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act in 1998, and probably weren't before then.

If you're on the side of capitalism, support China. If you agree with Disney's destruction of the public domain, support them.

Re:*smack*! (1)

tantaliz3 (1074234) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984257)

WOOhOO! Chinese Bootlegs!!

I am shocked! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18983837)

A communist country has no respect for Disney's intellectual property?! Say it ain't so!

(Not that I, a Libertarian, have much respect for Disney's IP either.)

Get used to it (5, Funny)

luchaugh (860384) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983841)

Today, Disney. Tomorrow, GM. Get used to it.

Re:Get used to it (5, Informative)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983915)

Today, Disney. Tomorrow, GM.

Errr, you meant: Today, Disney. Today [wikipedia.org] GM. China's been accused of 'Auto Piracy' already.

Get used to it

Yup.

Re:Get used to it (5, Insightful)

Jarjarthejedi (996957) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983973)

Err I think you means Today, Disney. Today, GM. Today, Microsoft. Today, IBM. Today, Medical Drugs. Today, everything but the kitchen sink. Tomorrow, the kitchen sink...

Re:Get used to it (2, Interesting)

anagama (611277) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983981)

As long as they repeat GM's unprofitability [spokesmanreview.com] , the world has nothing to fear.

Re: No. (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984267)

As long as they repeat GM's unprofitability, the world has nothing to fear.
There's nothing a rewrite of the Buy America law won't fix if you can hoodwink the business lobby. Of course, you could make it possible to give them a tax break if they redirected money from their foreign arm to the domestic one - since all they really care to do is to starve the UAW bound side to bankruptcy.

Do that, and you might be able to take care of the pesky manufacturers from the Land of the Rising Sun by closing those two loopholes as well.

Re:Get used to it (1)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983937)

If they can make GMs cars better then GM can, then that's GM's fault. If a Chinese car is a blatant ripoff of a GM car but works as well for half the price, do you really think I'm going to buy it from GM out of some misplaced sense of patriotic duty? If GM wants my money, they should make better cars. Americans don't know what a good car is. Drive a German car and you'll see what the rest of the world means when we say "American cars suck".

Re:Get used to it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18983993)

> Tomorrow, GM.

Well, in most of the world Chinese products have a better reputation for quality than American ones do, so if I can buy a knock-off of an American car that's higher quality, and a third of the price, you can bet they will get my money instead of GM. And maybe it'll last beyond the 100Kkm point where American cars fall into pieces...

Re:Get used to it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18984097)

And maybe it'll last beyond the 100Kkm point where American cars fall into pieces...
There is your problem: American cars are designed to be driven 62137 miles, which should be enough for anyone. Come on down to the dealer, we have a new model that I'm sure you'll love.

Re:Get used to it (2, Interesting)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984311)

And maybe it'll last beyond the 100Kkm point where American cars fall into pieces...

Bullpuckey! I had a Bronco with 230k miles with its original everything except tires and brakes, and oil(which it did use, but not burn) of course. The A/C still worked, and the only real problem it had was that the clutch was worn out and slipping. Many of the newer cars are warrantied for 100k miles before the first tune up. The only crappy "American" car I know of is the Chrysler product. And who owns them? In fact "American" cars are by name only. Kinda like the "Chicago" Cubs. How many of those guys are from Chicago?

Hope you're already used to it - Re:Get used to it (3, Informative)

Diamond Tree (51604) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984031)

Actually I hope you're already used to it. GM already lost a case - several years ago - where a Chinese manufacturer ripped off, bolt-for-bolt, panel-for-panel, an entire car and then released it to market BEFORE GM did! Brazen as hell. Toyota has also had problems in China for theft and such. I think when foreigners wake up to the fact that there's not really that much money to be made in China they might not be so enthusiastic about jumping in. For instance, huge numbers of cars are made over there, but everyone's killing each other on price. The Chinese are happy about it (they get new factories, trained workers, cars, etc.), but I don't think the foreigners are making any money.

Plus, as I referenced yesterday when commenting on this alarmist post [slashdot.org] about how the US may soon have "no comparative advantage" - China is not all it's cracked up to be.

Thing is, no one's making money in China, except for a few well-positioned people who can grease the right wheels. Nothing to see here, move along, it's the same old mercantilism and cronyism we find in all non-free markets. The sheer balls of the park manager telling the camerman they "newly invented" the characters ("It's not a mouse, it's a cat with big ears!") is classic.

This guy should be the new Iraqi Information Minister.

--
learnjapanese.poddedcell.net -- Step Up Nihongo, learn Japanese

Re:Hope you're already used to it - Re:Get used to (1)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984045)

it's the same old mercantilism and cronyism we find in all non-free markets

What? You mean that doesn't happen in free markets? I'm sure Bush and his Dick will be surprised to hear that!

Re:Hope you're already used to it - Re:Get used to (1)

Diamond Tree (51604) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984193)

Government-issued contracts for rebuilding previously state-owned assets in warzones certainly aren't decided in a "free market." No real capitalist would likely go into such a place anyhow, because they are highly concerned about preserving capital and war is the worst destroyer of capital ever.

Bush and his cronies are NOT operating in a free market. They're a bunch of rent-seekers who couldn't make it in a free market - or got lazy and decided to use influence to create money, instead of hard work.

It's because people allow themselves to be hoodwinked into believing that they are in a free market that we have trouble. Take, for instance, the people who claim the California energy deregulation was a failure of free markets - when in actuality it wasn't a free market at all.

--
learnjapanese.poddedcell.net -- Step Up Nihongo

Re:Hope you're already used to it - Re:Get used to (1)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984221)

That wasn't said, although I can see how, if you go in with the mindset that you will find some way to bash Bush in anything, you would infer it.

The point is, in China, that's all there is to be had. That's certainly not the case in the US.

Re:Get used to it (1)

HW_Hack (1031622) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984163)

Bound to happen as we "out-source" some or all of engineering design work in the name of "globalization" (saving $$ for stock holders). Sharing digital CAD files is basically giving your overseas "partner" the keys to your technology and research. You signed contracts etc. ... BFD - be prepared to see all - or parts of your technology being used "globally"

More evidence of "Write your own death warrant" (2, Insightful)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984187)

Get used to it.
Nothing a good, structured tax/tariff structure can't correct with regards to allowing shoddy imports to undercut quality. The idea is to reverse the damage done by that region of the world to our domestic industries (who seem to have done better in terms of quality when allowed to build domestic). Just enough that companies get the hint not to use countries like Mexico and regions of the world such as Asia to undercut domestic labor- which would be used as a retraining fund.

Today, Disney. Today, GM
What do you expect from a part of the world that seems to have forgotten quality, but how to become a large black hole for industries of other regions of the world? Certainly you cannot expect quality for a place like China.

Re:More evidence of "Write your own death warrant" (1)

Diamond Tree (51604) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984275)

> Nothing a good, structured tax/tariff structure can't correct with regards to
> allowing shoddy imports to undercut quality. The idea is to reverse the damage
> done by that region of the world to our domestic industries (who seem to have
> done better in terms of quality when allowed to build domestic). Just enough that
> companies get the hint not to use countries like Mexico and regions of the world
> such as Asia to undercut domestic labor- which would be used as a retraining fund.

Such cynicism is unfounded. Japan's manufactures after WWII were considered shoddy in the extreme - very low quality. None would argue that today. Remember the first Hyundais? Crap like the Kia, now look at them. China will come along - and meanwhile, we benefit from cheaper goods. Go out into the countryside and calculate how much more money is in the pockets of the less wealthy in this country because they can buy goods cheaply. Make no mistake, those who suffer most are the poor here when you create barriers to free trade.

Sure, you worry about lost jobs, but the fact of the matter is, the U.S. manufactures 22% of the world's manufactures, still, and China only 8%. Our value-added manufacturing is growing and has every year but two since the late 1980s.

The U.S. idea that we "deserve" to be top-dog in this area stems from an accident of history: our victory in WWII was accompanied by no significant domestic capital destruction. Whatever our factories made - for almost 30 years - was bought the world over.

> What do you expect from a part of the world that seems to have forgotten quality,
> but how to become a large black hole for industries of other regions of the world?
> Certainly you cannot expect quality for a place like China.

Ever driven a domestic car from the 1960s or 1970s? The quality was poor, and it was poor because Ford, GM, et. al., didn't have competition.

China will produce quality in time. Meanwhile, enjoy the cheap goods!

--
learnjapanese.poddedcell.net

Re:Get used to it (1)

WgT2 (591074) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984263)


Apparently they're interested in copying more than just U.S. missile technology.

Just goes to show.. (3, Interesting)

ModernGeek (601932) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983859)

..that the war between China and the United States is more of a legislative and economic one fought with dollars and cents. China and the Taliban don't need to take us by force, they simply need to take over our economy. China by manufacturing and selling unauthorized patented and copywritten equipment and now theme parks. We do all of the research and development, and they sell it at cost with no reimbursement, thus destroying our system of innovation, and allowing them to turn the world back into the stone age. The Taliban will take us by causing us to put all of our tax payers dollars into ammo.

Re:Just goes to show.. (1)

renegadesx (977007) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983939)

I suggest you do some research on China, you might be supprised.

Get back to me when you find out exactly how one phone call from China can crash the US economy (no I am not joking)

even if it were true - Re:Just goes to show.. (5, Insightful)

Diamond Tree (51604) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984135)

I presume you're talking about "them" calling "us" and saying "we've decided not to buy your government-issued debt anymore." Problem is, what would they invest their 1 trillion in government funds in then? It's not like there are that many - if any - safer alternatives? Euro bonds? Uhhh ... what was that long-term growth rate again? Yen? yeah right, the Chinese? Swiss Francs? Uhh ... sure it's a hard currency, but how much of it can you liquidate when you need to? Dollars are still the best place to park savings.

Also, China exports vast quantities to the US - they'd never cause our economy to "crash" if they could help it. It would create massive social unrest over there (and they can barely keep a cap on what they've got happening even right now). China's going to have many, many significant, huge, social problems in the mid-term. Their "one country, two systems" thing is inherently unstable and will fail. If China ever copies the fine pre-handover Hong Kong example which the British left the world, then move over U.S., because we're going to get trounced. In the meantime, China will simply remain a cheap place to manufacture lower-technology goods. I include computers and HDTVs in the "lower-technology goods" category. They've got far to much to lose to damage us that way.

But one of the above posters is totally correct: The real threat - the one thing that could bring us down - is ourselves. FDR was right about fear. If the US goes down, it'll be because we did it to ourselves.

--
for more on this topic, check yesterday's post [slashdot.org] .

-- Step Up Nihongo (learnjapanese.poddedcell.net)

Re:Just goes to show.. (5, Insightful)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983949)

We do all of the research and development, and they sell it at cost with no reimbursement, thus destroying our system of innovation,

Don't worry, the US did exactly the same thing in its infancy, ignoring European patents & copyrights at the govt level.

As soon as it became in the elite's interests to protect patents, copyright, etc, they were protected - the protections have become stronger & stronger over the years.

The same thing will happen in China. Get over it.

Re:Just goes to show.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18984105)

Sure, that's right. The worlds oldest civilization has to catch up with the good ol' USA. I think if the USA had anything good for China to copy, they would have embraced it by now. They've had thousands of years of experience in political struggle, power changes and population explosions to make the USA look like a newborn. Get over it.

Re:Just goes to show.. (1)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983951)

If your post is a reflection on the general level of understanding of society and the world in the US, the only thing the Taliban and China need to do to bring about the fall of America is wait.

China and the United States? (5, Insightful)

cgenman (325138) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983991)

Why is Disney now part of the United States? There are more disneylands around the world than here. They sell more worldwide than in the US. They're an international conglomerate that profits people in many, many countries and many areas.

It's like Ikea. Ikea may have started in Finland, but they employ and enrich a heck of a lot of Americans. Toyota might have started in japan, but the US would take quite a hit if they suddenly wholesale pulled out of here.

The world is not a bunch of governments ruling over these little corporations who spread their tentrils forth for the motherland. Companies superceed governments. Sony exists as much in England and Europe as Japan, and does as much R&D around the world as in their original country. Sega was started by an American in Japan, and whose japanese-sounding name is actually an abbreviation for SErvice and GAmes. We think of Burger King as an amercan company because it started here. In Thailand, they think of Burger King as a Thai company, because the people who work there are Thai, the people who eat there are Thai, the people who make the Thai commercials for Burger King are Thai. Any given piece of electronics is likely to have bits designed in the US, EU, China, India, and many other places.

Companies are not part of a government. They are their own entities in a parallel system.

MOD PARENT UP (5, Interesting)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984119)

OBL has openly written that they are out to destroy our economy. He wants us in the same boat that Russia was. So far, W. is helping him out.

As to China, they are trying to position themselves to own the world economy and then control countries in manners that they see fit(a MUCH larger USA with a nastier attitude). It is not the stealing of ideas that is doing this. It is the fact that they have tied their money to our money at a fixed rate. If it was allowed to float, then it would have increased in a big way by now. Others have dredged up the typical neo-con argument that this helps the economy. And for a short-term, they are correct. But it destroys the manufacturing (read tax) base. Another argument is that China holds a huge amount of our cash. And they will laugh if it falls, so long as they are in control. In the past, America had large natural resources to fall in during those times. Not anymore. What this means is that when China wants to pull the rug on us, they will be in control. And that is going to happen in about another 15 years (or less).

W.'s going to argue about the copyright and patents is almost akin to chargin Charlie Manson with litter AND making a big deal of it. It totally ignores the real problems.

Just Discovered? (5, Informative)

Nexx (75873) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983863)

Here's a picture [bbc.co.uk] from 10 April. Look at #2.

Fun Rides (5, Funny)

MrSteveSD (801820) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983869)

I've heard the Tiananmen Square Tank-Dodgems are really popular, although I think most children go to see the big cuddly cat, Chairman Meow.

Re:Fun Rides (1)

thisNameNotTaken (952374) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983897)

Free Enterprise AT It's Best

Re:Fun Rides (1)

BinaryPower (1089809) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983909)

Sounds like Disney shouldn't have ordered all of it's merchandise from china.

Re:Fun Rides (5, Funny)

scottrocket (1065416) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984171)

although I think most children go to see the big cuddly cat, Chairman Meow. aka, Mousey Tongue...

If they're policy on tattoos says anything... (3, Interesting)

krotkruton (967718) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983873)

Considering Disney has made a big deal about people getting tattoos of Disney characters, I can't imagine this will go over well. Actually, I didn't really believe it until I saw a couple other sources.

Re:If their policy on tattoos says anything... (4, Interesting)

interiot (50685) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983957)

I don't think you understand. China is a country. A large one. Disney is a company, one whose wishes are only enforced because some countries (eg. U.S., European countries) have agreed to use their police and border guards to enforce Disney's wishes. Clearly China doesn't agree to use its police/border guards in that way, and unless a small company has a remote chance of taking on a large country (be it economically or militarily), Disney really doesn't have much say in the matter. (granted, futuristic SciFi novels about corporations having more power than countries are interesting to read, but we're not there yet)

Re:If their policy on tattoos says anything... (3, Insightful)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984123)

Of course, the US government is more or less controlled by companies, including Disney. Thus the WTO complaint mentioned in the article. It'll be interesting to see if the US government is willing to actually do anything serious over this though.

Re:If their policy on tattoos says anything... (1)

Pfhreakaz0id (82141) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984211)

Yeah, I'm sure that China will pay just as much attention to those WTO rulings as, say, the U.S. has to the internet-gambling rulings.

Re:If their policy on tattoos says anything... (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984249)

It'll be interesting to see if the US government is willing to actually do anything serious over this though.
Nuh-uh... China has nukes <|-)

Re:If their policy on tattoos says anything... (2, Interesting)

QuickSilver_999 (166186) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984251)

...and unless a small company has a remote chance of taking on a large country (be it economically or militarily), Disney really doesn't have much say in the matter.

And this would be a good reason why I laugh at the so called International Court systems. If an American company manages to make a profit through ANY type of help by the government everyone in the world screams. China blatantly rips off a corporation and "nothing can be done." WTF? If the WTO and other organizations are that weak, why the HELL to we keep kowtowing to every stupid little demand they toss our way.

This would be a good time for America to slap huge tariffs on all Chinese products until this type of blatant crap is stopped. If Wallyworld has to pay $500 for that cheaply made American flag, I'm sure they'll find someone else to make them than the Chinese.

Let's just say "Screw China." They've never been our friends and they are working on destroying us economically and eventually politically. That's why they try to buy our politicians. How come everyone gets upset when the US tries to influence an election somewhere else (That's IMPERIALISM!) But when they try to buy the Clinton White House, no one says crap about it. How come THAT isn't Imperialism? Oh, cause they're a Communist country why they couldn't POSSIBLY have any Imperialist plans.

Sigh... Sorry... Button pushed...

Re:If their policy on tattoos says anything... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18984317)

They've never been our friends

Who the hell is?

Smells like SOY SAUCE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18983877)

fishy ain't it...

copy cats? (1)

zeroharmada (1004484) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983879)

wow... just wow.... I guess the Chinese really can copy just about anything.... for a culture that is striving for innovation and an independent economy..... I would just think that copying your rivals wouldn't be very conducive to that, but thats just me.

Re:copy cats? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18983919)

What's the big surprise? They have been doing it to every single other industry. The only thing independent and innovative about the Chinese economy is the number of corporate espionage cases it has every year.

Why businesses still consider China to be a good place to send their blue prints and ideas is beyond me.

Ironically, my CAPTCHA code is "soviet" and that rings pretty true.

Imitation, then innovation (1)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984127)

It seems pretty common sense to me that would be the model China is striving for. First you play catch-up to your competitors (imitation), then you work on surpassing them (innovation).

It helps that everyone is paying them for the first part and probably has sent the expertise and machinery and whatnot over there as well because of the cheap labor.

Japan itself has started out in the steel industry as a low-end producer (rebar) that the US steel giants didn't mind because that part of the business of low-end and low-margin that it let them "focus" on the high-end high margin stuff. This allowed Japan to get a foothold in the door and they are now one of the largest producers of steel while the US steel industry is in the dumps.

Re: copy cats? (1)

stephanruby (542433) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984237)

First, you copy -- once you've mastered that part -- then you develop new styles and new techniques of your own. It takes patience and dedication to refrain from skipping that first not-so-exciting step. And unless you're an individual that comes out of the womb an original genius, this is how most people learn to speak, to walk, to write, to draw, to play the piano, to learn sciences, to program a computer, etc. First you copy, then you master, then -- and only then -- you experiment.

And note that when China was during its most innovative period, people copied each other all the time, and this was viewed with great pride -- not as some act of pilferage. For example, some of the great works produced by Chinese philosophers didn't bear the name of their original authors, they bore the names of the Philosophers those authors were trying to emulate.

too funny (5, Insightful)

chitselb (25940) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983887)

Last time I checked, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves was in Grimm's Fairy Tales, a compilation of European folk stories that existed long before Walt Disney or copyright/trademark laws. As the dad of three, it bugs me more than a little when Disney Inc attempts to own childhood fantasy and retroactively copyright/trademark/turn-into-disney-IP all kinds of things that were part of the childhood psyche-scape long before Uncle Walt was even born.

Re:too funny (3, Insightful)

zakezuke (229119) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983975)

Last time I checked, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves was in Grimm's Fairy Tales, a compilation of European folk stories that existed long before Walt Disney or copyright/trademark laws. As the dad of three, it bugs me more than a little when Disney Inc attempts to own childhood fantasy and retroactively copyright/trademark/turn-into-disney-IP all kinds of things that were part of the childhood psyche-scape long before Uncle Walt was even born.
I think the problem is the fact that they took disneyland/disneyworld's magical kingdom and copied the characters pretty close to verbatim. The story may be public domain, but artistic renderings are different.

What is disturbing is the fact that that Disney released this film in 1937, and good old walt died in December 1966. Some of their earlier would should be in the public domain by now if the copyright law wasn't extended.

Re:too funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18984235)

Some of their earlier would should be in the public domain by now if the copyright law wasn't extended.

The sad part of it is that they extended the copyright laws just to keep Disneys earlier works, such as Snow White, from falling into the Public Domain.
Sonny Bono of the congress lobbying just for Disney.. AhhhAhhhAhhh! AhhhAhhhAhhh! Watch out for that tree.

Re:too funny (1)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984019)

+1 on all that. I also have a problem with Disney implanting ideology into their content. Looney Tunes, Merry Melodies etc all are highly politically charged when you look past the childish representation of the characters. For example, it is reasonably clear that Disney was (and probably still is) a racist organization. I saw a cartoon, now banned, that depicted blacks on a cotton farm as thick brutes. Look also at their cartoons that depict characters intended to represent countries, such as Pepe Le Pew. Their behavior and mannerisms are carefully constructed to impart on a young, pliable mind a set of preconceptions that will guide the way that mind later in life perceives the nature of that culture.

This goes generally for all TV these days. Characters and representations of people and places are all engineered to ensure that the perceptions imparted lead to reactions that serve the purposes of the masters of the media.

Re:too funny (1)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984091)

+1 on all that. I also have a problem with Disney implanting ideology into their content. Looney Tunes, Merry Melodies etc all are highly politically charged when you look past the childish representation of the characters. For example, it is reasonably clear that Disney was (and probably still is) a racist organization. I saw a cartoon, now banned, that depicted blacks on a cotton farm as thick brutes. Look also at their cartoons that depict characters intended to represent countries, such as Pepe Le Pew. Their behavior and mannerisms are carefully constructed to impart on a young, pliable mind a set of preconceptions that will guide the way that mind later in life perceives the nature of that culture.

Looney Tunes, Merri Melodies, Pepe lePew == Warner Brothers (not Disney)

Get back to us when you actually have a firm grasp on what you're talking about, rather than that incoherent confusion currently in your head.

Re:too funny (1)

zakezuke (229119) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984287)

For example, it is reasonably clear that Disney was (and probably still is) a racist organization. I saw a cartoon, now banned, that depicted blacks on a cotton farm as thick brutes. Look also at their cartoons that depict characters intended to represent countries, such as Pepe Le Pew. Their behavior and mannerisms are carefully constructed to impart on a young, pliable mind a set of preconceptions that will guide the way that mind later in life perceives the nature of that culture.
I am sure you are talking United Artists. There are a series of Merry Melodies [wikipedia.org] that are rather like you describe, that show those of african decent as being obsessed with craps, unable to pronouce the letter v or th (Coal black & de sebben dwarfs), and generally being shown in a negative light.

What's sad is among the "banned 11" they do a great job of showing the influence jazz had on american culture, and the people who made them were probally not actually racists. Hell depicting farm hand slaves as brutes in it self is not racist, as i'm sure most were not purchaced for beauty. During America's golden age on animation, we were for the most part a very racist segrated society.

Re:too funny (1)

Hebbinator (1001954) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984053)

The story existed long ago, but the character's likenesses can still be copyrighted.

Not all sets of seven dwarves look like that. Same would go for an "Aladdin" character- you can put anyone in a turban [logoi.com] and call him Aladdin, but if he looks like this [imdb.com] you could get in trouble for infringing on original artwork.

Tieneman Square Tank Ride (-1, Troll)

rts008 (812749) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983889)

In Disneyland China, tank rides you.

No thanks,I'll just stick with the one in California.

Better than the original (1)

vipintm (903567) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983917)

Chines version of Disneyland may be better than the original one. Chinese are good in building in best way. So this can be a question for original Disney regarding the qulity.

Re:Better than the original (1)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984117)

Chinese are good in building in best way.
I'd love to hear your reasoning. Yes, the Great Wall is quite a feat. However, when I visited several years ago, the (admittedly extremely small) portion I saw was crumbled and "fixed" up for tourists in an egregiously offensive way. Much of the tourist attractions there were like that (Forbidden City, etc. Only the Summer Palace seemed impressively built to me).
      My Chinese colleagues all say that they'd much rather NOT buy most Chinese goods (except food---I have to say that authentic Chinese food is the best in the world, almost regardless of what it is, or what style it's in) because of their poor quality. Plumbing, especially, and electronics.

Ah yes, billions. BILLIONS! (1)

alisson (1040324) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983921)

I'm sure that every chinese person was going to go to the real disneyland, but with this fake one, what's the point? No need to spend thousands of dollars that you "have," no-sirree!

Well whaddaya know (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18983923)

It *is* a Small World(TM) after all!

Interesting Twist (5, Funny)

miracle69 (34841) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983931)

In America, Disney owns the government. In Soviet China, the government owns Disney!!!

Or something like that.

Yeah, Sounds About Right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18983941)

I'll bet they charge people to use the park too.

These are the same bastards who take half of Yao Ming's paycheck [usatoday.com] , remember.

They don't deserve Yao's cash that he sweats for and they certainly don't deserve any profit from ideas that someone payed with time and hard work to create.

Of course, this is why I'm not a socialist or communist and China still claims to be despite backwardness all over the place.

Pirates of the Yangtze (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18983963)

US: You cheated!
China: Pirate...

China: Put it away, son. It's not worth you getting beat again.
US: You didn't beat me. You ignored the rules of engagement. In a fair fight, I'd kill you.
China: That's not much incentive for me to fight fair, then, is it?

China: The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do. For instance, you can accept that your father was a pirate and a good man or you can't. But pirate is in your blood, boy, so you'll have to square with that some day. And me, for example, I can let you drown, but I can't bring this ship into Tortuga all by me onesies, savvy? So, can you sail under the command of a pirate, or can you not?

Re:Pirates of the Yangtze (1)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984087)

I've always loved that theme from the movie. Kinda puts the whole "terrorists don't fight fair" thing into perspective.

We need a hero (1)

michaelmalak (91262) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983969)

We need Sonny Bono to show those Chinese. Oh wait, he's dead. Maybe we should elect Fred Thompson to be president. Yeah, he'll take care of the Chinese, just like in Hunt for Red October. It's like he's the best of Sonny Bono and Ronald Reagan all rolled into one.

P.S. Ron Paul bumper stickers are available at cafepress.com [cafepress.com] .

Re:We need a hero (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18984279)

Why? will Thompson beat up on Cher, run up massive deficits, commit treason to cut deals with other countries, lie to the American Public, and invade small countries?

Too easy (1)

Mathness (145187) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983979)

The domain name is bs-amusement-park.com, BS? BS!? Come on, at least give us a challenge to poke fun at the name, this is too easy. :P

Zippo (0, Troll)

Sigmon (323109) | more than 7 years ago | (#18983987)

After watching a special on CNBC the other night regarding Zippo (The famous cigarette lighter company) and their battle with Chineese rip-offs... and now this... I'm beginning to realize at some point in the future there will be dire consequences for China's blatent lack of respect for international intellectual property laws (among other things). Consequences as in trade embargos... or even war. Better wake up China! The giant will ignore a mouse nibbling at his ankle only for so long....

Re:Zippo (3, Insightful)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984059)

The giant will ignore a mouse nibbling at his ankle only for so long....
Of course, when dealing with China, it can be a little ambiguous as to who is the giant and who is the mouse.

Re:Zippo (1)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984085)

Why do you assume anyone can take on China? They have the largest army in the world and manufactor a massive amount of stuff for the rest of the world. China has a lot more power than people assume and if you got into a war with them you would most likely lose on "fair terms" (aka no nukes, which if you used would probably get you nuked back any way).

They have a massive amount of man power and would be extremely difficult to fight considering all the manufactoring plants they have that could be turned to weapons think of everything China makes changed to make guns and basic body armour, you could fit the entire country out in weeks).

Re:Zippo (1)

Sigmon (323109) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984239)

Why do you assume anyone can take on China?
1) I don't assume anyONE could take on China. When was the last war or major military action by a significant power in the world that was conducted only by that power with no additional allied involvement? I can't think of anything recently.

2) Vastly superior numbers != military advantage

3) I only mentioned war as a distant possibility

Re:Zippo (2)

jlarocco (851450) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984185)

Don't hold your breath.

The United States is so dependent on cheap crap made in China it's not even funny. Take a look around your house and look for "Made in China". There's a good chance you have more stuff made in China than made in all other countries combined. Any serious trade embargos against China would end up hurting us a whole lot more than it would hurt them.

And don't even think about war. China has nukes. Not to mention they can have more people in their army than the U.S. has people. And then there's the fact we're already spread pretty thin in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Re:Zippo (1)

Mizled (1000175) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984241)

Consequences as in trade embargos... or even war. Better wake up China! The giant will ignore a mouse nibbling at his ankle only for so long...

War with China?!?! Are you nucking futs? China is pretty scary...If they want to have their own Disneyland I say more power to them. No need to go to war with them...

Re:Zippo (1)

fabs64 (657132) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984259)

Why is china nibbling on their own foot?
A war between China and the US would be a lot more evenly matched than you realise, sheer weight of numbers friend.

"Let China sleep for when she awakes, she will shake the world" - Napoleon Bonaparte

Re:Zippo (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984273)

Well - with the mouse never expires laws, madatory DVD region locking and software patents I really have no respect for the IP laws of the USA even though I do respect those in other countries.

I hope that was a joke and not serious advocacy of war - the USA couldn't handle a war against Iran at this point without WWII style sacrifices and a war against China would be suicidal. Most of the military allies of the USA do more trade with China than the USA so it would be a solo effort without even financial support and an economic disaster within weeks (a big chunk of the US economy is banks borrowing money from China to lend to poeple to build houses) . Even small wars have consequences for decades. There are idiots that would like to start a cold war with China for distraction and personal gain but they are idiots with very little respect for the law.

you ARE insane (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18984305)

war with china? no way.

any politicians who even suggest that need to be voted out REAL damm fast before they get us all killed!

china has so many people they could arm them all with rocks and sticks and STILL kick the worlds collective ass. nukes? china has them too. and alot more of them i'd imagine.

dont even suggest war with china. i dont want to die.

and trade embargos? ha. yeah right. know what china NEEDS from the world? squat.

know what we need from china? just about all our crap is made there these days. from pc's to plastic crap. they make it.

as the biggest dog on the planet. china can do WHAT EVER CHINA WANTS. with 1.some Billion people. and a goverment that has total control and loyalty. dont mess with china.

captcha: populate

There is Something Positive in This, maybe... (3, Interesting)

TyrWanJo (1026462) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984001)

This is an interesting expression of the saturation of global culture, and how, despite the perceived barriers between easter and western societies, these gaps are slowly dissolving. What i find most interesting is that, as far as i can tell, the park is so popular - legal issues aside, this does imply within the Chinese population some tension between the west and the east has been eased. Although this is perhaps not the best place to find shared cultural values, it is a start, and i think it would do well for Disney not to castigate the government of China, but rather try to reach some sort of compromise or understanding. Unfortunately, being that they are a corporation, it is unlikely that they will see anything but a lawsuit. One can hope, but that hope is likely misplaced.

unauthorised, illegal (1)

sonictheboom (546359) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984007)

Unathorised by Disney. Illegal, no, unless Disney has registered a copyright on all the contents. They probably have registered copyrights on some of the stuff but probably never thought that someone would copy the WHOLE of their theme parks!

Re:unauthorised, illegal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18984181)

I think world trade agreements require china to respect the united states' copyrights and vice versa. don't know much about economics, but i imagine there's not really any pressure on china to, since putting trade sanctions on them is completely unrealistic - denying american businesses access to such an enormous market would be a pretty good incentive for them to pick up and move elsewhere.

Okay... (5, Funny)

EvanED (569694) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984017)

So, I've heard of bootleg DVDs, bootleg CDs, bootleg Rolex watches... but I think this has to be the world's first bootleg amusement park!

Good (0, Flamebait)

quokkapox (847798) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984023)

We can only hope we are witnessing the death throes of state-sponsored protection of the antiquated intellectual property regime that has been built up over the past several hundred years.

You can't "own" an idea anymore. It's absurd to even try in a world with instantaneous global communication networks. We got a little taste of this two nights ago with the digg 09:f9 revolt. We see memes getting remixed all the time over on 4chan /b/.

Welcome to the future. Your contributions to the culture of humanity will be mercilessly dissected, reshuffled, caricatured, parodied, paraded, criticized, subclassed and recycled.

This is progress.

Re:Good (1)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984145)

This is progress

If by "progress," you mean the erosion of any incentive for long-haul, difficult, expensive creative projects that don't involve performing in bars, then, sure, I guess.

Re:Good (1, Flamebait)

vandan (151516) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984233)

Oh come ON! Corporations are the least likely to invest in the long-haul stuff. What they do is give puny donations to universities, who then spend millions of tax-payer dollars in R&D, and right at the end, your corporation will come back, patent the idea, and cry blue murder if someone suggests that it's not theirs .

Anyway, what exactly did Disney do that's so fucking special? If the Chinese government want to open an amusement park, who the hell are you or Disney to say what they're allowed to be amused at? Do you think the sky will fall if Chinese kids can see Mickey Mouse without paying excessive ( particularly in their terms ) kick-backs to US corporations?

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18984345)

No, but I think that if people can't be certain that they will have the ability to benefit from their ideas, they will be reluctant to invent.

Not bad but ... (1)

emkman (467368) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984035)

Just wait until they can fit all of Disneyland on one bootleg HDDVD or BluRay Disc.

Time for disneys 70 year old copyright to expire (4, Interesting)

viking80 (697716) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984063)

For how long should disney really have monopoly on Winnie the Pooh for example.

I think it is time that the copyrights from 1920 or so expire for the enjoyment of all.

Raise the dead (1)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984093)

It looks like we'll have resurrect Sonny Bono and install him as our new ambassador to China.

Not surprising (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18984095)

This just in: The chinese government doesn't give a damn about western patents and copyright. Film, as they say, at 11.

Makes sense to me... (2, Interesting)

i_like_spam (874080) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984109)

I bet the government built the fake Disney as a way to avoid further international embarrasment related to overcrowding at the real China Disney [hongkongdisneyland.com] in Hong Kong.

The crowds swelled beyond belief during the Chinese New Year in 2006. Parents were so distraught that they started throwing their kids over the entry gates [local6.com] . There were some hilarious videos of this floating around out there. Can anyone find a link?

Welcome to... (0)

doyoulikeworms (1094003) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984139)

The Happiest Prace on Earth!

Hoax? (1)

Mathness (145187) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984149)

Looking at some of the photoes, they look like they are taken of random parades or people who are dressed up, and some of the buildings shown appear to be models or mockups.
Lots of more or less well know characters appear throughout it all, and it all look really cheaply made (in the bad sense, those costumes are baaadly made).

I can't help but rate this very high on the fake-o-meter, at least until we get more from a well known source.

Oh hey (1)

kjzk (1097265) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984227)

I heard they downloaded the Disney theme with bittorrent.

In Communist China (1)

Shemmie (909181) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984253)

Intellectual property is a Take-Away. That's one copy of Vista Ultimate, and a scale-replica of Disneyland to go!

IP-based economies (5, Insightful)

Fractal Dice (696349) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984271)

My feeling is that any economy built upon intellectual property is a house of cards. Sooner or later, someone just decides not to play. They simply declare themselves as rich as you are. It's like a bubble market: it only has value as long as everyone buys into the delusion that it has value ... then it goes "pop!". If a country with all the manufacturing infrastructure and a country with all the legal IP rights to that tech have a conflict, is there really any doubt who wins?

Definition (1)

robbiedo (553308) | more than 7 years ago | (#18984293)

This is obviously the definition of chutzpah.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?