The Wonderful World of David Oneal

[Squalls Ahead]

So, if I wanted to share another set of rare recordings with all of you (that have not been released officially or unofficially), there's just no feasible way that I can do that without Dave getting his hands on them and making a profit, right?

 

[BLM07]

So, if I wanted to share another set of rare recordings with all of you (that have not been released officially or unofficially), there's just no feasible way that I can do that without Dave getting his hands on them and making a profit, right?

Wow, I'm certainly curious as to what you have, I never forgot those rare parade and Epcot tracks!

 

[Horizons]

So, if I wanted to share another set of rare recordings with all of you (that have not been released officially or unofficially), there's just no feasible way that I can do that without Dave getting his hands on them and making a profit, right?

He doesn't acquire and sell everything that's out there.

 

[Squalls Ahead]

Well, I guess I shouldn't fret over it. There's really nothing I can do to stop Mr. O'Neal.

My next question then is how do I make the files available? As I recall there was a little bit of grumbling about me posting links here (although everyone was happy I did), to the files that I shared several years ago. What is this forum's policy on that?

 

[almandot]

i think the forum's policy is don't post them.. even more strictly than before when you posted your old stuff. it's not that most everyone here doesn't download stuff still but it's sort of become "do that over on Rodentsections and keep it off of here".

 

[Magic Music]

Disney Files Copyright Infringement Lawsuit Against David Oneal Through Its Glendale, CA Copyright Attorney Over Infringing Motion Pictures, Television Programs, and Musical Compositions Advertised and Sold on the Internet

Oneal does business using the websites classicthemeparks.com, extinctattractions.com, extinct-attractions-club.com, extinctattractionsinsiders.com, extinctattractionsradio.com, and 02d992c.netsolstores.com, among others

Lawsuit Details

​

Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al

Court Case Number: 2:10-cv-01425-GHK-RNB

File Date: Thursday, February 25, 2010

Plaintiff: Disney Enterprises, Inc. and Wonderland Music Company, Inc.

Plaintiff Counsel: James Andrew Coombs and Nicole L Drey of J Andrew Coombs P.C.

Defendant: David Oneal and Does 1-10, inclusive

Cause: 17:101 Copyright Infringement

Court: California Central District Court

Judge: Judge George H. King, referred to Magistrate Judge Robert N. Block

Docket Text

2/25/2010 5
DECLARATION of NICOLE L. DREY RE JOINDER filed by Plaintiffs Disney Enterprises, Inc., Wonderland Music Company, Inc. (et) (Entered: 03/01/2010)

2/25/2010 4
REPORT ON THE FILING OF AN ACTION Regarding a Patent or a Trademark (Initial Notification) filed by Disney Enterprises, Inc., Wonderland Music Company, Inc. (et) (Entered: 03/01/2010)

2/25/2010 3
REPORT ON THE FILING OF AN ACTION regarding a copyright (Initial Notification) filed by Disney Enterprises, Inc., Wonderland Music Company, Inc. (et) (Entered: 03/01/2010)

2/25/2010 2
NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs Disney Enterprises, Inc., Wonderland Music Company, Inc., identifying Other Affiliate The Walt Disney Company for Disney Enterprises, Inc. (et) (Entered: 03/01/2010)

2/25/2010 1
COMPLAINT against Defendants Does 1-10 inclusive, David Oneal. Case assigned to Judge George H. King for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Robert N. Block. (Filing fee $ 350 PAID.) Jury Demanded., filed by Plaintiffs Wonderland Music Company, Inc., Disney Enterprises, Inc..(et) (Entered: 03/01/2010)

2/25/2010
21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint - (Discovery) 1 as to Defendants Does 1-10 inclusive, David Oneal. (et) (Entered: 03/01/2010)

On the Net:

Justia.com: Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al

 

[freedomnoise13]

I don't know what all this means but sounds like the guy's in trouble!

 

[Magic Music]

Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al

COMPLAINT for Copyright Infringement; Trademark Infringement; Unfair Competition; Trademark Dilution

Pages 1-9 of 26:

 

[Magic Music]

Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al

COMPLAINT for Copyright Infringement; Trademark Infringement; Unfair Competition; Trademark Dilution

Pages 10-19 of 26:

 

[Magic Music]

Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al

COMPLAINT for Copyright Infringement; Trademark Infringement; Unfair Competition; Trademark Dilution

Pages 20-26 of 26:

 

[Magic Music]

Then this guy is a genius. I could be profiting from my hobby and paying to send my kids to school. I wonder how much this clown makes.

Still think he's a genius?

This isn't some 7 year old who downloaded Bananas in Pajamas and is getting sued by the RIAA, this is some guy making money off of selling Disney audio.

He probably wishes he was a seven-year-old right about now!

 

[stevek]

Bout time!

 

[Club 33]

Wow. Thanks Jay for posting this- please keep us updated. I don't think it's stretching to say that this is an important case with far-reaching implications for the entire Disney audio fan community.

I'll be following this with interest.

 

[almandot]

It's interesting.. i'm not a legal expert, or legal novice, or legal anything, but reading through the statements it appears he's bring brought to task on issues like using the logos and various movies that Disney owns the copyright to, but the only music included is Bear Necessities and Heffalumps and Woozles, nothing else like the DL Forever tracks or anything.

 

[Magic Music]

...but the only music included is Bear Necessities and Heffalumps and Woozles, nothing else like the DL Forever tracks or anything.

Can you imagine how many pages you'd have if you attempted to include every single infringement in your complaint?

Jumping to paragraph 18...

18. Wonderland owns exclusive rights under the Copyright Act to certain musical compositions, including the rights to reproduce, distribute or license the reproduction, distribution or performance of the musical compositions, including, but not limited to, those copyrights that are the subject of the copyright registrations reflected in Exhibit C, attached hereto (collectively the "Wonderland Works").

On to paragraph 25...

25. Upon information and belief, Defendants have copied, reproduced, distributed, performed, advertised and/or sold and continue to copy, reproduce, distribute, perform, advertise and/or sell Unauthorized Product and/or Services containing copies of motion pictures, television programs, and/or musical compositions owned by Plaintiffs, including, but not necessarily limited to, Plaintiffs' Works. Defendants have not been authorized by Plaintiffs to reproduce, distribute, sell or offer for sale any of the Plaintiff's Works.

 

[eyore]

...but the only music included is Bear Necessities and Heffalumps and Woozles, nothing else like the DL Forever tracks or anything.

Can you imagine how many pages you'd have if you attempted to include every single infringement in your complaint?

Jumping to paragraph 18...

18. Wonderland owns exclusive rights under the Copyright Act to certain musical compositions, including the rights to reproduce, distribute or license the reproduction, distribution or performance of the musical compositions, including, but not limited to, those copyrights that are the subject of the copyright registrations reflected in Exhibit C, attached hereto (collectively the "Wonderland Works").

On to paragraph 25...

25. Upon information and belief, Defendants have copied, reproduced, distributed, performed, advertised and/or sold and continue to copy, reproduce, distribute, perform, advertise and/or sell Unauthorized Product and/or Services containing copies of motion pictures, television programs, and/or musical compositions owned by Plaintiffs, including, but not necessarily limited to, Plaintiffs' Works. Defendants have not been authorized by Plaintiffs to reproduce, distribute, sell or offer for sale any of the Plaintiff's Works.

I find one of the most interesting complaints is the use of stuff not up to the Disney quality.
That's a sure-fire winner there!
Disney has always stood by the quality aspect of things and (as it says) people thinking that cheap home made CDs and DVDs are Disney approved could have a big impact on their sales ("don't buy Disney products, they are shoddy" is far from the truth and the last thing they want people to think - I'd better add that I consider Disney products to be top quality and assured to be so).
That, I think, is where Disney will get substantial compensation. Damaging the image of Disney quality is something that probably loses them more money than anything else.
I hope he's got deep pockets.

 

[almandot]

maybe the trial will be offered up on one of dave's webcams...


wonder if disney needs eye witness testimony

 

[Magic Music]

wonder if disney needs eye witness testimony

You'd think this guy would be busy removing evidence from his umpteen dozen websites, but as Momma Gump reminds us, "Stupid is as stupid does."

A Facebook snapshot taken moments ago, complete with customer comments:



"Got it. It's Lovely!"

"Love this Download! ...a must have for WDW Resort Fans!"

Yes, a must have! Why buy the Grand Floridian Society Orchestra's CD from WDW/the band, when you can buy some crummy MP3s from brother Dave?

 

[almandot]

so im curious.. daves been sued several times before hasnt he? dunno what for specifically though. wonder how thisll play out differently

 

[Magic Music]

so im curious.. daves been sued several times before hasnt he? dunno what for specifically though. wonder how thisll play out differently

I've searched for cases where a "David Oneal," "David Oneil," "David Collier," or "Daniel Lopez" may have been named as a defendant, and I can only find the current (02/25/2010) "Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al."

Has Oneal actually been sued before? Got me. How many other names does he go by? Perhaps he just likes to talk a big game. I've heard some total B.S. coming out of his mouth on the couple of podcasts that I bothered to listen to, so...

As for any prior intellectual property lawsuits that might have involved "Disney" and "Oneal," I do see that the Civil Cover Sheet ([post=32072]pages 25 and 26 of the complaint[/post]) says:

VIII(a). IDENTICAL CASES: Has this action been previously filed and dismissed, remanded or closed? ☑ No ☐ Yes

VIII(b). RELATED CASES: Have any cases been previously filed that are related to the present case? ☑ No ☐ Yes

(If anyone is curious: yes, I did have to pay to receive a copy of the complaint.)