# Disney assumes full operational control of Hulu **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Tags:** disney-hulu\ **Created:** [May 14, 2019, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970 "2019-05-14T20:27:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/21 "2019-05-15T15:07:31Z")
I know this is a Pit thread masquerading as a Cafe Society thread, but I think it could be argued that Michael Eisner was the single greatest CEO of the last half of the 20th-century and Disney’s post-1982 comeback is, in my opinion, far more impressive than Apple’s. And I say this because post-Jobs Apple has largely done nothing, while post-Eisner Disney has gone from success to success to success to success in an industry based upon _art_. Sorry to buck the trend here, but given I just watch 3-hour clips of songs from the 70s on YouTube intermixed with the occasional top-10 list, I don’t have a dog in this fight. And the complaint about “all our entertainment being on 3 carriers” is kinda funny to a person who remembers 2 daily newspapers and 3 TV channels. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/22 "2019-05-15T15:13:15Z")
Disney will have three streaming services: Disney, Hulu, and ESPN. I would guess that the branding will be different. Movies and kids’ shows on Disney. TV shows on Hulu. Sports and live-content on ESPN. They could overlap as well (think of it as marketing hooks to their other streaming services). Looks like a typical market-segmentation business model. It’s difficult to argue that Disney is too large and needs to be broken up while also noting that content is spread over too many competing streaming services. If there’s significant consolidation then anti-trust crowbars should be used, but I don’t see it at the moment when Netflix, Disney, Time-Warner, Viacom, and Comcast are all competing. ---
**Author:** ![naita](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naita/32/5862_2.png) [@naita](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/naita)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/23 "2019-05-15T15:15:02Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > Nope. It was Adolph Hitler. > > The expansion started in Europe, where Disney doesn’t have as much influence. While they certainly were happy for it, the main impetus was to keep _Mein Kamph_ from being in the public domain. Is that supposed to be a joke? If not, do you have a cite? _Mein Kampf_ entered the public domain in 2015, 70 years after the death of the author, as per Copyright law in most of Europe since the 1960s, and before that it was 50 years. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/24 "2019-05-15T15:29:28Z")
The difference is, we didn’t have to rent three different cable services back when we had 3 channels. With cable TV subscription getting ridiculously overpriced, there’s a lot of pricing room for people to have a number of streaming services after cutting the cord and still save money. A digital antenna and DVR can, for most people, stand in perfectly fine rather than pay for a network stream. But the landscape is still changing and the “Star Trek:Discovery” trial balloon could signal a cliff edge in how television entertainment is distributed. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/25 "2019-05-15T15:49:20Z")
Yeah, this is silly. Disney is the primary lobbyist concerning copyright law in an effort to maintain its trademark and control of the Mickey Mouse character. > **[Disney’s Influence on United States Copyright Law](https://www.theiplawblog.com/2016/02/articles/copyright-law/disneys-influence-on-united-states-copyright-law/)** > > If you’ve ever applied for, or researched copyright law, you likely learned one thing above all else: it’s not a perpetual right. So, how, you might > [@](#): > > In 1928, Walt Disney released the first Mickey Mouse cartoon: Steamboat Willie. At that point, the work was entitled to protection for 56 years (28 years for the initial term and the 28-year extension). Under the Copyright Act at the time, the copyright on Mickey Mouse should have expired in 1984. But before Disney’s mascot could be pushed into the public domain by operation of law, Disney embarked on a serious lobbying mission to get Congress to change the Copyright Act. > > Disney’s lobbying paid off in 1976 when Congress passed legislation which changes the copyright scheme such that individual authors were granted protection for their life, plus an additional 50 years, and for works authored by a corporation, the legislation granted a retroactive extension for works published before the new system took effect. The result was that the maximum term for already-published works was extended from 56 years to 75 years, thereby extending Mickey Mouse’s protection out to 2003. > > If the extensions ended there, then obviously Mickey Mouse would be in the public domain right now. But 5 years before Mickey Mouse’s copyright was set to expire, Congress changed the scheme again. In 1998, Congress passed the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998, which lengthened copyrights for works created on or after January 1, 1978 to “life of the author plus 70 years,” and extends copyrights for corporate works to 95 years from the year of first publication, or 120 years from the year of creation, whichever expires first. Once again, Mickey Mouse’s copyright protection lived to fight another day. Now, Mickey’s copyright will not expire until 2023. But even that is only 7 years away. The question is: what will Disney do now? Disney would not possibly allow its most famous character to go into the public domain, would it? ---
**Author:** ![Quimby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/22d042/32.png) [@Quimby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quimby)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/26 "2019-05-15T15:54:56Z")
Why are people being obtuse about this? Disney paid a shit load of lobbyists to get Copyright laws changed to their benefit. It happens every day in Washington. ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/27 "2019-05-15T15:58:16Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Since Disney bought Fox, it’s unlikely that they will lose that content immediately, but given that disney now owns two different streaming services, I suspect they’re going to split some of Hulu’s content between Hulu and Disney+ so that you have to subscribe to both to get the stuff you previously got just from Hulu. NBC is interested in launching their own streaming service, so it’s likely that they yank their content from Hulu as soon as they’re legally able to. So you’re probably looking at at least 3 subscriptions now to do what Hulu alone once did. To be fair, Disney+ is probably going to yank content that was previously on Netflix (Marvel movies & shows, Star Wars, etc) more than stuff previously on Hulu. NBC is definitely going to pull all their stuff from Hulu and Netflix for their streaming service, which will hurt Netflix far more (as the top two shows streaming on Netflix are “The Office” and “Friends”). ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/28 "2019-05-15T16:59:29Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > Yeah, this is silly. Disney is the primary lobbyist concerning copyright law in an effort to maintain its trademark and control of the Mickey Mouse character. Extending copyright term doesn’t help you maintain a trademark. Trademarks are already of limitless term so long as they remain distinctive and in use. > [@](#): > > [Disney’s Influence on United States Copyright Law | The IP Law Blog](https://www.theiplawblog.com/2016/02/articles/copyright-law/disneys-influence-on-united-states-copyright-law/) That blog is a series of bare assertions. Where is the actual evidence that Disney, as opposed to any other copyright holder, is responsible for the changes in the law? > [@Quimby](#): > > Why are people being obtuse about this? Disney paid a shit load of lobbyists to get Copyright laws changed to their benefit. It happens every day in Washington. Sure, it happens every day in the law. Where is the evidence that Disney, as opposed to any other media company or copyright holder, is uniquely responsible for this? What justifies making snarky remarks about Disney and copyright term as opposed to any other large media company or copyright holder? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/29 "2019-05-15T18:08:13Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Sure, it happens every day in the law. Where is the evidence that Disney, as opposed to any other media company or copyright holder, is uniquely responsible for this? What justifies making snarky remarks about Disney and copyright term as opposed to any other large media company or copyright holder? They were the most involved lobbyists and one of the biggest stakeholders in copyright legislation. Could you explain why these facts, that you surely know, are unimportant? ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/30 "2019-05-15T18:24:16Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > They were the most involved lobbyists and one of the biggest stakeholders in copyright legislation. Could you explain why these facts, that you surely know, are unimportant? These things are not proof. Again, how does that make them different than any other large media company? Why don’t people bring up copyright term legislation in discussion about any other large media company? What concrete facts and real evidence justify singling Disney out? Really, if such evidence exists, I myself want to know. I’d love to have another reason to dislike Disney. But so far this just seems like malicious gossip. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/31 "2019-05-15T19:18:12Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Again, how does that make them different than any other large media company? Disney is one of the largest, riches media companies ever, and was in 1998 as well. Disney was instrumental in getting the Sonny Bono act passed, even if lots of other companies supported it, simply by virtue of their size and the money they could bring to bear. It sounds like you _agree_ that Disney had a huge impact in getting the law passed, but you just don’t think there’s any reason to single them out as opposed to the many other supporters of the law. Which is fine, but you have to admit, few other supporters of that law were as huge as Disney. It’s a distinction without a difference. “Disney wasn’t _instrumental_ in getting the law passed, they were simply the _largest_ and most _influential_ supporters of the law”. Okay. You got us there. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/32 "2019-05-15T22:40:49Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Disney is one of the largest, riches media companies ever, and was in 1998 as well. Disney was instrumental in getting the Sonny Bono act passed, Show me the evidence. Not bare assertion, not rumor, not innuendo, not gossip. What is the evidence that Disney was “instrumental.” In fact, define what “instrumental” means. Does it mean that the act wouldn’t have passed without Disney support? I think that’s false. There was broad support to harmonize the U.S. copyright term with the EU Directive of 1998. I suspect it would have happened had Disney spent not a dollar on lobbying. Maybe I’m wrong. But I’m not the one asserting that Disney was “instrumental.” Anyone asserting that should ask ēmself why ē believes that to be true and whether there’s evidence to justify that belief. > [@](#): > > even if lots of other companies supported it, simply by virtue of their size and the money they could bring to bear. In 1998, there were several companies comparable to Disney’s size and resources. > [@](#): > > It sounds like you _agree_ that Disney had a huge impact in getting the law passed, No, I don’t know that one way or another. > [@](#): > > but you just don’t think there’s any reason to single them out as opposed to the many other supporters of the law. No, I’m responding to people offering Disney’s size and interest in copyright protection as proof that Disney was somehow uniquely responsible for it. I’m saying there were plenty of companies in Disney’s position. That in itself doesn’t prove the assertion. > [@](#): > > Which is fine, but you have to admit, few other supporters of that law were as huge as Disney. That’s not evidence to support the assertion. > [@](#): > > It’s a distinction without a difference. "Disney wasn’t _instrumental_ in getting the law passed, If it’s not true then, arguably, folks should stop asserting it. I’m asking for evidence that it’s true. ---
**Author:** ![naita](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naita/32/5862_2.png) [@naita](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/naita)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/33 "2019-05-15T23:14:10Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Show me the evidence. Not bare assertion, not rumor, not innuendo, not gossip. What is the evidence that Disney was “instrumental.” In fact, define what “instrumental” means. Does it mean that the act wouldn’t have passed without Disney support? > > I think that’s false. There was broad support to harmonize the U.S. copyright term with the EU Directive of 1998. I suspect it would have happened had Disney spent not a dollar on lobbying. US copyright law goes beyond EU law, specifically by having vastly longer terms for works created for corporations. Here’s a CNN article about Eisner visiting the Senate Majority Leader to lobby for keeping Mickey Mouse out of public domain just a little bit longer: [http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/08/10/cq/disney.html](http://edition.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/08/10/cq/disney.html) Of course if you want a document where congressmen say “We did this to please Disney” you can stay on your high horse, as such documents never exist, no manner the level of lobbying. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/34 "2019-05-16T00:34:01Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > I think that’s false. There was broad support to harmonize the U.S. copyright term with the EU Directive of 1998. I suspect it would have happened had Disney spent not a dollar on lobbying. OK, you made the claim, now show the proof. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/35 "2019-05-16T11:38:46Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > OK, you made the claim, now show the proof. Representatives of a wide range of creative industries testified in favor of the bill, including individual songwriters and musicians. It wasn’t just Disney. It wasn’t just the movie industry. A lot of people wanted this to happen. So it’s very strange to me to single out Disney as a villain in this story. They were _all_ in on it. My recollection is that the bill passed both the House and Senate without a recorded vote. That means not a single representative or senator called for a recorded vote. This happens when there is broad support for a bill. You can possibly assert that Disney bought off every single member of the Senate and House, but how likely is that? That not one of the pro-consumer members of Congress would insist on a recorded vote? Asking for a recorded vote is one of the most common routine motions in Congress. It happens all the time, several times a day when committees are in session or votes are on the floor. So to me the more likely conclusion is that there was broad support for it. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/36 "2019-05-16T16:05:38Z")
You know, I don’t want to come in here with a “just believe me!” cite, but my major was in economics with an emphasis on economic history, I have read no fewer than four fat-assed thick books on the history of Disney _the company_ (Not “Disney the art” or “Disney the films” - the company) including Eisner’s retrospective, James B. Stewarts book “DisneyWar”, and a few others, and… while **Ascenray** is correct in noting that there were other interested parties who also wanted copyrights extended, to argue that Disney was just another player is just a-historical. This discussion is focused on the 1998(?) changes to the copyright laws, but the real Disney push came in the mid-1970s, when a foundering company realized that their most valuable assets were about to become public domain _and_ that many of these assets… unknown to any but key Disney officials… weren’t even registered properly by Walt and crew when they first started. The big change in mid-1970s copyright law… other than the extension… was that works which were unpublished and unregistered were _now_ protected under copyright law even if it wasn’t published or registered, and, if the artist/owner so desired, they could now be registered. Whew! Bet your ass that when this thing went into effect on 1-1-78, on 1-2-78 the copyright office received a metric fucktonne of registrations from Disney, etc. Anyway, like I said - I’m not going to go back and buy some 30 year old book, re-read it, and then give a proper cite, but to argue that Disney was just “one of the guys” when it came to copyright law changes… especially the 1970-era changes… is not supported by the historical evidence. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/37 "2019-05-16T17:39:39Z")
In the 1976 film _Silent Movie_, Mel Brooks made fun the then current buy-ups of movie studios and such, calling the main company Engulf and Devour as a parody of Gulf+Western (Now Paramount, Viacom, CBS, etc.) Disney is Engulf and Devour now. The current news is the Engulf part. The Devour part will come later. Hulu will be folded into Disney’s upcoming streaming service which will be Good For Everybody. And if you think otherwise, then you are a Disney critic and if you hate Disney, then you are just plain un-American and deserve the worst possible fate. (As to the copyright law sidetrack: follow the money. No one [del]bribed[/del] donated like Disney to key congressmen.) ---
**Author:** ![ekedolphin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ekedolphin/32/10003_2.png) [@ekedolphin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ekedolphin)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/38 "2019-05-16T18:29:01Z")
No, if Hulu were engulfed into Disney+, there’d be no R-rated films on Hulu, because Disney has already stated that Disney+ won’t have any. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2019, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970/39 "2019-05-17T22:05:59Z")
> [@ekedolphin](#): > > No, if Hulu were engulfed into Disney+, there’d be no R-rated films on Hulu, because Disney has already stated that Disney+ won’t have any. Maybe Hulu will be part of a sister network, Disney++? 😉 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disney-assumes-full-operational-control-of-hulu/833970.md?page=1)