Skip to content

New Order drummer hits out at Disney Joy Division T shirt

Archived

62 replies · 4,914 views

This is an archived legacy thread. Replies are closed, but the discussion is preserved.
← Back to Digital Republic
63 posts ↑ First post Latest post ↓

“I was quite angry when I first saw it. No one asked us. They’re trading off the band and our album cover, but get away with it by apparently saying the design was ‘inspired’ by us. I don’t like the design at all. It’s horrible. I can’t imagine any Joy Division fans wearing it. Or anyone for that matter. Clearly, no one investigated the history of the band before coming up with this idea. It’s bizarre.” said Morris.

http://louderthanwar.com/featured/new-order-drummer-hits-out-at-disney-joy-division-t-shirt

0 likes

Oh, great.

Stephen's turned into a stroppy miserable cunt as well now. :\ohwell: :laugh:

0 likes

El Jarvo wrote: Oh, great.

Stephen's turned into a stroppy miserable cunt as well now. :\ohwell: :laugh:

El Jarvo wrote: Oh, great.

Stephen's turned into a stroppy miserable #$#$ as well now. :\ohwell: :laugh:

0 likes

Tower Ballroom wrote: I've just oreded one :laugh:

This one's better. :nod:

0 likes

i knew there was a reason that i hate disneyland.

0 likes

El Jarvo wrote: Oh, great.

Stephen's turned into a stroppy miserable cunt as well now. :\ohwell: :laugh:

He does seem to be taking it harder than Hooky but then he is more of a t-shirt connoisseur.

0 likes

Tower Ballroom wrote: I've just oreded one :laugh:

is that ORDER or a NEW one?

0 likes

Well you do get grumpy when you get older. After all, just read most of the posts on this forum. :laugh:

I'm holding out for the Disney lowlife shirt :thumb:

0 likes

El Jarvo wrote: Oh, great.

Stephen's turned into a stroppy miserable cunt as well now. :\ohwell: :laugh:

Al - Please remember that Linus doesn't like the word 'cunt', even though Stephen is sounding like one.:lol:

0 likes

Turn Jim wrote:

I'm holding out for the Disney lowlife shirt :thumb:

0 likes

Mickey Mouse has grown up a CASH cow!

Is there LIFE behind bars? :laugh:

0 likes

Jed Stephens wrote:

Turn Jim wrote:

I'm holding out for the Disney lowlife shirt :thumb:

Actual LOL

0 likes

Ooooh...this is pretty good....gives me some more ideas for my other thread!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA

:evil4: :evil4: :evil4: :evil4: :evil4: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

0 likes

What's wrong with Steve? Where's his sense of humor? I laughed a lot with that t-shirt... :rofl:

0 likes

Jed Stephens wrote:

Turn Jim wrote:

I'm holding out for the Disney lowlife shirt :thumb:

That's a classic!

0 likes

Jed Stephens wrote:

Turn Jim wrote:

I'm holding out for the Disney lowlife shirt :thumb:

Very cool.

0 likes

Jed:

Make it and I will purchase a gross!

0 likes

Jed Stephens wrote:

Turn Jim wrote:

I'm holding out for the Disney lowlife shirt :thumb:

Need a Minnie Mouse for the back... Daffy and Goofy inside sleeve.

0 likes

0_o wrote:

Jed Stephens wrote:

Turn Jim wrote:

I'm holding out for the Disney lowlife shirt :thumb:

Need a Minnie Mouse for the back... Daffy and Goofy inside sleeve.

Daffy?

What the duck?

0 likes

Looks like this lucrative line of new merchandise for Disney has been nipped in the bud... Link...

Snorri xxx

0 likes

STAY ON TARGET!

0 likes

Snorrimon wrote: Looks like this lucrative line of new merchandise for Disney has been nipped in the bud... Link...

Snorri xxx

Emo kids of the world rejoice. :uhoh:

0 likes

El Jarvo wrote: Oh, great. Stephen's turned into a stroppy miserable cunt as well now. :\ohwell: :laugh:

Well he has but I agree with him on this (not just because of Joy Division element). As the article points out, there are twats everywhere wearing Ramones and Motorhead T-Shirts because they've been told they're cool irrespective of whether they've even heard of the bands. The fact that the musicians get no money from this is equally annoying.

Also, if it means I dont end up seeing Kerry Katona wearing a fucking Unknown Pleasures T-Shirt then he can be as stroppy and cunty as he likes :nod:

0 likes

0 likes

Genetic wrote:

El Jarvo wrote: Oh, great. Stephen's turned into a stroppy miserable cunt as well now. :\ohwell: :laugh:

Well he has but I agree with him on this (not just because of Joy Division element). As the article points out, there are twats everywhere wearing Ramones and Motorhead T-Shirts because they've been told they're cool irrespective of whether they've even heard of the bands. The fact that the musicians get no money from this is equally annoying.

The Ramones and Motorhead logos are surely not in the public domain though, are they? They're copyrighted and are specific to those bands, and have been used on all their merchandise.

Taking a random Joy Division album cover, whose image was surely in the public domain already, is pushing it a bit really. Or are we suggesting that Joy Division are paying the original photographer a fee everytime this is reprinted? I doubt they've paid any such fee ever, have they? Which is why I'm guessing they used it in the first place?

I've just ORDERed a NEW beardtrimmer from Argos. Is Stephen gonna throw a hissy one cos of the use of his bandname in this sentence?

0 likes

Couldnae gie a Daffy Duck to be honest :D

0 likes

ShugZV wrote: Couldnae gie a Daffy Duck to be honest :D

Shirley Daffy Duck's colour scheme is a blatant rip off of the Hacienda colours.... :nonono:

Snorri xxx

0 likes

El Jarvo wrote: Taking a random Joy Division album cover, whose image was surely in the public domain already, is pushing it a bit really. Or are we suggesting that Joy Division are paying the original photographer a fee everytime this is reprinted? I doubt they've paid any such fee ever, have they? Which is why I'm guessing they used it in the first place?

Hooky agrees with you, yes YOU, taken from NME..

"From a legal point of view, the image is in the public domain, as Disney know..."

0 likes

Genetic wrote:

El Jarvo wrote: Taking a random Joy Division album cover, whose image was surely in the public domain already, is pushing it a bit really. Or are we suggesting that Joy Division are paying the original photographer a fee everytime this is reprinted? I doubt they've paid any such fee ever, have they? Which is why I'm guessing they used it in the first place?

Hooky agrees with you, yes YOU, taken from NME..

"From a legal point of view, the image is in the public domain, as Disney know..."

And to be fair most of Saville's artwork is 'inspired' by exisiting works anyway, be it photos, paintings, typeface catalogues, etc.

Snorri xxx

0 likes

Snorrimon wrote: And to be fair most of Saville's artwork is 'inspired' by exisiting works anyway, be it photos, paintings, typeface catalogues, etc.

Snorri xxx

That's a roundabout way of saying he's a lazy cunt?

0 likes

El Jarvo wrote:

Snorrimon wrote: And to be fair most of Saville's artwork is 'inspired' by exisiting works anyway, be it photos, paintings, typeface catalogues, etc.

Snorri xxx

That's a roundabout way of saying he's a lazy cunt?

Suppose so - except I'd never use the c-word... Linus wouldn't like it, the sensitive twat... :evil4:

Snorri xxx

0 likes

So Stephen hates it and Hooky things its alright and a compliment. They still cant agree....on anything!!.:\ohwell:

0 likes

Genetic wrote: STAY ON TARGET!

Um, yes

0 likes

El Jarvo wrote:

Genetic wrote:

El Jarvo wrote: Oh, great. Stephen's turned into a stroppy miserable cunt as well now. :\ohwell: :laugh:

Well he has but I agree with him on this (not just because of Joy Division element). As the article points out, there are twats everywhere wearing Ramones and Motorhead T-Shirts because they've been told they're cool irrespective of whether they've even heard of the bands. The fact that the musicians get no money from this is equally annoying.

The Ramones and Motorhead logos are surely not in the public domain though, are they? They're copyrighted and are specific to those bands, and have been used on all their merchandise.

Taking a random Joy Division album cover, whose image was surely in the public domain already, is pushing it a bit really. Or are we suggesting that Joy Division are paying the original photographer a fee everytime this is reprinted? I doubt they've paid any such fee ever, have they? Which is why I'm guessing they used it in the first place?

I've just ORDERed a NEW beardtrimmer from Argos. Is Stephen gonna throw a hissy one cos of the use of his bandname in this sentence?

original photographer? it's not a photo is it? isn't it a radio telescope picture?

0 likes

Bill Holding wrote:

Excellent work Bill, I wouldn't have expected anything less from you!

0 likes

Snorrimon wrote:

El Jarvo wrote:

Snorrimon wrote: And to be fair most of Saville's artwork is 'inspired' by exisiting works anyway, be it photos, paintings, typeface catalogues, etc.

Snorri xxx

That's a roundabout way of saying he's a lazy cunt?

Suppose so - except I'd never use the c-word... Linus wouldn't like it, the sensitive twat... :evil4:

Snorri xxx

Yeah you are right, Let's be nice human beings to each other and not use profane words

0 likes

El Jarvo wrote: I've just ORDERed a NEW beardtrimmer from Argos. Is Stephen gonna throw a hissy one cos of the use of his bandname in this sentence?

I don't blame Steve for being a tiny bit pissed off that the cover of one of jointly-his albums is being exploited to make filthy lucre for a huge media conglomerate which is already rolling in cash. Taking something which is clearly Joy Division artwork - the Cambridge Science source is probably a moot point in 2012 - and altering it to sell tat without permission is pretty disagreeable.

I suppose the point is: do Disney think they can do what they like with other people's work? A tad hypocritical as I read a story recently where they allegedly sued a small fancy dress company into the ground because one or two of their costumes resembled characters from the bloody Jungle Book.

What's good for the goose apparently ain't all that good for the gander.

So from that perspective alone I reckon Steve is entitled to his hissy fit on this occasion :laugh:

0 likes

NotAMod wrote:

El Jarvo wrote: I've just ORDERed a NEW beardtrimmer from Argos. Is Stephen gonna throw a hissy one cos of the use of his bandname in this sentence?

I don't blame Steve for being a bit pissed off that the cover of one of jointly-his albums is being exploited to make filthy lucre for a huge media conglomerate which is already rolling in cash. Taking something which is clearly Joy Division artwork - the Cambridge Science source is probably a moot point in 2012 - and altering it to sell tat without permission is pretty disagreeable.

I suppose the point is: do Disney think they can do what they like with other people's work? A tad hypocritical as I read a story recently where they allegedly sued a small fancy dress company into the ground because one or two of their costumes resembled characters from the bloody Jungle Book.

What's good for the goose apparently ain't all that good for the gander.

So from that perspective alone I reckon Steve is entitled to his hissy fit on this occasion :laugh:

You do understand the concept of 'public domain', Ally? This picture was in the public domain. Which is probably why Joy Division used it originally. So it's definitely not 'clearly' Joy Division artwork, nor have Disney 'altered' anything of Joy Division's - they've altered a picture which appeared in some Cambridge Encyclopaedia.

I thought Stephen was being a bit thick in all of this and genuinely believed Saville had designed it just for Joy Division, but the Manc Evening News has run a story saying that it was Morris who suggested it to Saville originally, so he's a bit hypocritical to get so wussy here.

I wonder what those good folk at Cambridge think? I bet they're not having a hissy fit (and maybe they did when Joy Division nicked their pic all those years ago?)

0 likes

You're probably right that nothing can be legally done, Al.

I do still think there is a certain hypocrisy to what Disney have done based on previous court cases. It's curious to hear they've withdrawn the t shirt from sale just as the ex-members of Joy Division spotted it and commented on it in the press.

Surely, they could have just kept on selling it with no fear of any comeback, legal or otherwise?

Or are they wanting to avoid bad PR?

Edit: I thought Bernard recommended the image to Saville, not Steve? :confused2:

0 likes

NotAMod wrote: Edit: I thought Bernard recommended the image to Saville, not Steve? :confused2:

Not according to THIS article.

0 likes

Who actually owns the copyright of the album artwork, is it Saville, Joy Division or Warners, I'd say probably Warners, in which case I woldn't put it past them to have sold the rights to the image, though I'm not sure the relationship between Warners and Disney is that good.

0 likes

Bill Holding wrote:

THIS IS FANTASTIC! Love it!!

:thumb: :thumb: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

As good as the piss-takes on my own Zippy thread elsewhere....:shades: :nod: :nod:

0 likes

El Jarvo wrote: I wonder what those good folk at Cambridge think? I bet they're not having a hissy fit (and maybe they did when Joy Division nicked their pic all those years ago?)

Bit different. JD didnt make a coin from being associated with the swots did they? Wheras Disney is trying to make a coin from being associated with JD.

As are Lucasfilms...

0 likes

Jed Stephens wrote: Who actually owns the copyright of the album artwork

It's in the public domain.

0 likes

Genetic wrote:

El Jarvo wrote: I wonder what those good folk at Cambridge think? I bet they're not having a hissy fit (and maybe they did when Joy Division nicked their pic all those years ago?)

Bit different. JD didnt make a coin from being associated with the swots did they? Wheras Disney is trying to make a coin from being associated with JD.

They could've picked a more popular band. :\ohwell:

0 likes

While it's probably legal, I tend to agree that it's a tad hypocritical of Disney. Public domain or not, the image is now synonymous with JD. Disney is now milking this association for profit, however meagre.

If the design wasn't being appropriated by such a sickly sweet kids' brand that turns over US$41B and has a history of aggressively protecting its own images, I doubt the care factor would be there.

:\pimp3:

0 likes

Surface wrote: Disney have now taken it off sale

Lets hope George Lucas does the same before people start demanding to know where he stands on the whole Hooky V New Order saga.

0 likes

Genetic wrote: Lets hope George Lucas does the same before people start demanding to know where he stands on the whole Hooky V New Order saga.

He'll probably want to re-release Pumped Full Of Drugs, Academy, 3 16, 5 11 and Live in Glasgow with a CGI Jabba the Hutt playing keyboard in the background.

Oh and they'll be shit as a result :nod:

0 likes

NotAMod wrote:

Genetic wrote: Lets hope George Lucas does the same before people start demanding to know where he stands on the whole Hooky V New Order saga.

He'll probably want to re-release Pumped Full Of Drugs, Academy, 3 16, 5 11 and Live in Glasgow with a CGI Jabba the Hutt playing keyboard in the background.

Oh and they'll be shit as a result :nod:

As long as doesnt stick that walking rasta frog thing in I dont mind.

0 likes

Interesting comment from Hooky on this - Link thingy.

"you never know, this might be just the thing that brings me, Bernard and Stephen together to have a laugh and a drink"

0 likes

Facinating, great and timely. The closest we've seen to an olive branch from his side, I hope t'other lot see it that way and react.

I just hope Hooky doesnt knacker it by doing a Disney soundtrack or summat.

0 likes

El Jarvo wrote: Interesting comment from Hooky on this - Link thingy.

"you never know, this might be just the thing that brings me, Bernard and Stephen together to have a laugh and a drink"

Hooky wrote: "When I formed Joy Division in 1977...

then this comes up and all hell breaks loose again!

:laugh:

0 likes

Hooky wrote: "Life is too short to be at loggerheads like this," he says. "And you never know, this might be just the thing that brings me, Bernard and Stephen together to have a laugh and a drink. And maybe Walt can achieve what no amount of people seem to be able to do in the world, and bring Joy Division back together."

So his masterplan is to get Joy Division back together so he doesn't have to involve Gillian?

0 likes

James Thomas wrote:

Hooky wrote: "Life is too short to be at loggerheads like this," he says. "And you never know, this might be just the thing that brings me, Bernard and Stephen together to have a laugh and a drink. And maybe Walt can achieve what no amount of people seem to be able to do in the world, and bring Joy Division back together."

So his masterplan is to get Joy Division back together so he doesn't have to involve Gillian?

If only they'd frozen Ian!

0 likes

Hook: "When I formed Joy Division in 1977"

going off the rails

:crazy:

p.s. I have been really looking forward to his JD book, but am now getting concerned with all this crap the past few months. I have a really bad feeling it is going to be all full of his agenda and be totally political and self-serving. :(

0 likes

Andy wrote:

James Thomas wrote:

Hooky wrote: "Life is too short to be at loggerheads like this," he says. "And you never know, this might be just the thing that brings me, Bernard and Stephen together to have a laugh and a drink. And maybe Walt can achieve what no amount of people seem to be able to do in the world, and bring Joy Division back together."

So his masterplan is to get Joy Division back together so he doesn't have to involve Gillian?

If only they'd frozen Ian!

They could get the remains of Joy Division together.

0 likes

Who ever proofread the article is illiterate. God Lord, at least 3 glaring mistakes.

0 likes

Tarbox23 wrote: I have a really bad feeling it is going to be all full of his agenda and be totally political and self-serving. :(

You think? :laugh:

To be fair, the others (if they did books) would probably be similar. Bernard's on record as saying he wants to write a book but for it to come out after he's gone.

Personally, I reckon Stephen would write probably the most balanced and best account of the band's history. He's been a diplomat during all this split business and he (generally) has the best memory. Recent UP artwork quote notwithstanding.

0 likes

Genetic wrote: Facinating, great and timely. The closest we've seen to an olive branch from his side, I hope t'other lot see it that way and react.

I just hope Hooky doesnt knacker it by doing a Disney soundtrack or summat.

He's been quietly been waving olive branches for months. It's amazing what the whiff of cash can do.

Funny how he says this whilst pursuing legal action. Talk to me or I'll sue.:nonono:

0 likes

Yum, Joy Division cake.

0 likes

Gnu Odor wrote: Yum, Joy Division cake.

Patisserie Exhibition.

0 likes

You're leaving NewOrderOnline

This link goes to an external website we don't operate, which has its own privacy policy and terms.

Destination:
Continue ↗