Alright, but think about it this way. All of the places you've mentioned ban photography. So you're breaking the rules (if not the law) just by taking the video of photographs, regardless of what you do with them. Disney, on the other hand, DOES allow photography, and even brags about how the castles are the most photographed places on earth.
But what if I go down to Hollywood, and do a video tour of the Chinese theater, the Hollywood sign, and Hollywood and Highland? All private property, and much of it trademarked. All the work and artistry of other people. Or even to use your example, what if you do go down to New York, and film Times Square, and other landmarks? Certainly I daresay photos of Times Square have been sold
What if I go down to Vegas and shoot video of the Bellagio fountains, or the pirates show at Treasure Island?
And where exactly does the line start? if I film or photograph in the esplanade, what then? Downtown Disney? The hotels? What if I'm not even on Disney property but accross the street, and I photograph the monorail going by?
What if I'm at Disney World and I get on the Epcot monorail, and film that? I haven't actually entered Epcot, all I've done is film an experience that is fully free and open to the public. But in doing so I've managed to capture images that show the inside of Epcot.
And just to be REALLY difficult- what if I go onto Disneyland and I do a painting of New Orleans Square. Do I not have the right to sell that painting? And if so, what about a photo then? A video?
What if I have a reel of film I shot in 1970 at Disneyland, and I want to sell it on ebay?
What about Steve Wessen's virtual 3D ridethrough of Adventure's Through Inner Space, which he spent over 2 years creating himself on his computer?
Where are you going to draw the line? See my point here is that "it's illegal because Disney owns it" isn't going to cut it- it's not nearly specific enough. To convince me your going to have to show me exactly what portion of copyright law prevents it. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, just saying I don't know what it is or what the terms of it are. A physical area is different than a show or a movie, which is easy to specify in copyright. And I'm not really sure how you copyright an attraction. I could go open up my own space-themed roller coaster in the dark with music, and while maybe I couldn't call it Space Mountain, I really don't think Disney could sue me.
And I'll go ahead and put it this way. If it's a problem, why hasn't Disney sent Jeff Lange a cease and desist (as far as we know)? Why have they really done very little legally to even try to stop what has become a market of fan-produced DVDs? Illegal trading of internet files on peer-to-peer networks is one thing, but these sites are very openly run.
And this, mind, is in a climate where we have Disney fan sites threatening to sue each other! DisLive.com got sent a cease and desist today from DISboards.com threatening them with legal action over trademark violation for use of the word "Dis" in their URL and name. And you're telling me Disney couldn't easily fire one off to any of these sites?
If you ask me, it's because really, what is Disney's motivation to do so? Such activities do not harm Disney, do not endanger any of their many businesses, and if anything serve to advertise it as I have said.
