Jim Hill gets banned from Disney

Clearly, Disneyland management felt that Jim Hill could be misrepresenting the company and saw it fit to act. I don't blame them.

I only wish that, rather than "ask" him to leave, Disneyland instead locked him in a room with nothing but two english teachers, eighteen dictionaries and six dozen grammar text books. Hill's writing is horrendous and, though his stories are sometimes full of interesting content, it is a chore to read.

Sam-

It's true that it's private property and the owners of said property can enforce their rules as such, however it's still shady and unfair to subject certain people to certain rules and then ignore others.

I've never seen a tour by people not working at the parks...I don't get it? What's the point?

Michael, who says that Disney is being unfair with their rules? It's not like there are several different unofficial pay tours on the property, and he's the only one being thrown out. The content of the tours may be in question, but I'm sure that Disney isn't happy that he's charging people for his unofficial tours. Even though the guests may have paid before entering the park, the bottom line is that he's conducting his own business inside of Disney, which isn't exactly legal, especially considering that Disney conducts its own tours of similar nature. The difference between Jim and the Brazilian tour guides is that those people conduct the whole trip from start to finish, whereas Jim is there simply for giving tours of the park. If the tours in question were free then we might have a right to question Disney's ethics; however, the fact that he's being paid for them makes it a totally different scenario.

What if a visit to Disney *is* somebody's whole trip from start to finish? What if they live down the street? Does that make it different?

---

Peabody said:
I have mixed feelings on Jim's tours. He collected no money on Disney property. There are MANY other unauthorized tours of disney going on all the time.

---

Agree totally...but I'd bet my last mouse-ka-dollar that ANY tours going on at Disney that do not BELONG to Disney either: 1) pay money TO Disney for *authorization*, or 2) risk the same fate as Jim's. Nobody takes money from the Mouse, he's actually quite ruthless and has LOADS of attorneys searching out "infringement" on his turf...LOL! ;)

---

Brian Noble said:
The first amendment only limits the ways in which the government can shut you up. If a private business doesn't like what you are saying on their private property, they can ask you to stop. If you don't stop, they can ask you to leave. If you don't leave, they can have you arrested for trespass.

Summary: you have no "right" of "free speech" on private property.

---

As usual the voice of reason belongs to Mr. Noble. :)

Regardless of Jim Hill's side of the story, I don't think he was shut up because of what he was saying. He was stopped because his unauthorized tour was making him money on the Disney name and the straw the broke the camel's back (or at least alerted the camel) was three cluelees ladies.

If the average guest could confuse an unauthorized tour for the real deal, thus taking money out of the mouse's pocket and putting it in someone else's, then the issue had to be resolved in Disney's eyes.

It's probably some weird combo of the three that resulted in the stopping of Jim Hill's tours, but I'd bet the 'making money off Disney's name and property' played a much larger issue than Mr. Hill's side of the story makes it sound.

I'm hardly a Disneyana type person, but I do find the Jim Hill site entertaining and it's a daily stop for me.

^I agree with you 100 percent. Jim Hill was making money for himself on Disney property. They have every right to put a stop to that.

Second, his tour was confused with an official tour. For this reason alone, Disney made an acceptable move to stop his tours.

It would be like standing at the door of McDonalds selling burgers you grilled yourself. You simply can´t show up at a business unauthorized and sell the same product as that business.

About the Brazilian tour groups, I am sure they go through guest relations and let them know of their presence. I am positive that this wasn´t the case with Jim Hill´s under-the-table tours.

Oh do not get me started on the Brazilian tour groups!

When I was at Universal this past year, the yellow t-shirt wearing, whistle blowing, loud mouth Brazilians were all over! hehe... While waiting for Twister, the leader would start clapping and then the group would go nuts every 5 minutes! I am all for enthusiasm, but please, there is a line and they crossed it. I even made a scientific diagram... line -> | :) :) :) :) < Brazilians on wrong side of line.

But disney doesnt care if brazilian groups act like animals and piss off other people because they make loads of money on them. Disney would much perfer to stop a small/quiet group walking around the park not bothering the average guest than do antyhing to clamp down on a large group of people like the brazilians who ruin the enjoyment of any average guest who is anywhere near them!!!!!!!!

For the record, I enjoyed living in Palo Alto during the '96 World Cup; Brazil played 2-3 of their pool matches at Stanford, and the weekly parade of Brazilians marching down University Ave to the match made that summer a hoot for me.

In this case it is not necessary for Jim Hill's tours to be confused with an official tour for there to be an infringement. The courts have ruled that an infringement may exist if you simply take business away from the rights holder. In other words if people go on Hill's tour instead of going on the Disney tour even knowing that it is not official there is an infringement.

Not saying it is right or wrong, just saying what the courts have ruled. Marylanders probably remember the case of M. R. Ducks tee shirts vs. M. R. Not Ducks tee shirts.

Some of you can't actually be serious, can you? Would it be OK for someone to enter the Disney parks and start selling hot dogs or T-shirts? This isn't any different from that. Go into your local Wal-Mart and try to start selling Tupperware and tell me what happens. All of the other circumstances are totally irrelevant.

Jeff actually hot the nail on the head. This Jim Hill meathead is acting as a vendor, or a tenant. He is doing nothing for Disney except making money for himself.

If he was actually paying rent or a commission to the parks, and advertising offical behind the scenes tours, and Disney was taking a cut of the action, then it is a different story. Of course, Disney would regulate what is the meat of the tour.

Bottom line, Lil Jim is collecting money on private property for goods and/or services, that are not approved my management, and Disney themselves operate a competing business. He might do better selling that tupperware in the parking lot.

I agree that Disney was within it's rights to stop Jim Hills tours, but they have been given before with a "wink and nod" from the folks at Disneyland.

By Jim Hill's own admission he made a mistake. I don't think this is huge deal and a lot is being made out of nothing. Disney was backed into a corner. When the people who accidently got on his tour complained, they really had no choice but to address the situation. By not checking the names off the list, Jim left himself vulnerable to the Mouse's wrath. As a result, he won't be giving anymore tours but he got a lot of mileage and free publicity for his website.

I guess the big question is on Jim's next visit to the park, will he be followed around and have security listen to his converstations to enforce the policy. What if he just hanging out with friends (not a paid tour) discussing the same things he talks about in the tour?