• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Oakwood Discussion

...and all this gives me another simple explanation in the sad twists of life.

My current work car "filofax" is an ultra cheap cardboard kids folder of post its, notepad, notelets and matching pen.
I tell my customers I must consult the Tinkerbell file for jobs lists.
Trademark and copyright free, so dirt cheap.
And so macho for a big gardener.

And a million miles off topic again, sorry...

Oakwood?
Dead innit?
 
NuttySquirrel said:
I'm surprised they never got into trouble for using the Peter Pan IP actually. The rights to which were given to Great Ormond Street Hospital with unusually no expiry date. Withholding royalties from sick kids would have kicked up a stink in the press.
Click to expand...
So the rights to the characters in Peter Pan, based on the book, are owned by Great Ormand Street and Oakwood did actually make a donation to Ormand Street for the use of the IP. The only exception is Tinkerbell who is owned by Disney, hence why all references to Tinkerbell at Oakwood were referred to as ‘Tink’. Apparently in the book, she is sometimes referred to as Tinkerbell, which Disney own the rights to, but there’s also references to her as Tink in the book, which is not Disney owned. Or so one of the Oakwood directors told us anyway.

In terms of Neverland, it was actually a very successful project for Oakwood. Summer of 2013 (the year it opened) the park was rammed, it’s the only time I’ve ever seen Speed run three cars for example. It had a hugely positive effect and really got me wondering why, if a few clapped out rides from Camelot with a simple retheme can get so many people in, why were Aspro so reluctant to support further investment. I guess we’ll never know.
 
JamesP said:
www.bbc.co.uk

Oakwood theme park quick sale calls amid trespass fears

The theme park, loved by generations of Welsh children, closed suddenly in March.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
TL;DR, Oakwood as we knew it is unlikely to reopen if even Aspro couldn't make it a viable business. Bluestone would be hesistant to buy the site unless the land was sold at a low price. Politicians want to keep the site for recreational purposes and to retain jobs within the local area, although they recognise the Welsh tourism has pivoted towards attractions such as Zip World, with ziplines and alpine coasters, which are a fraction of the cost of theme park hardware.

Best case scenario is that an operator like Zip World and Bluestone form a joint venture to buy the land, potentially retaining a ride or two like Megafobia for sentimental reasons. But even that is a stretch.
 
Not that has been made public, so I assume Aspro still own it.

Don’t think I agree with the sentiment in the article that if Aspro couldn’t make it work then no one could! They also don’t seem that willing to engage over the future of the site if Pembrokeshire’s MS is still waiting for them to get back in touch after a month and a half.
 
rob666 said:
Typical capitalist company spiel...
"If we can't do it, nobody can."
Click to expand...
Or rather they don't want to as if they did and the one who they sold it to makes a far better job than they ever did it'll expose them for being poor at their job.
 
Interesting economic "analysis" on that BBC article... and basically exactly what @rob666 was taking the mick out of. "If we can't do it, no one else can" is pretty much the analysis that economist provided. Absolute pish.

The article then goes on to say that many businesses have been in contact with Aspro. Which is it, unviable or something many businesses want? Aspro are seemingly very quiet. I reckon they're negging other businesses against each other to finally sell the land at a huge markup.
 
Ffinian said:
The article then goes on to say that many businesses have been in contact with Aspro.
Click to expand...
Not quite - the Tory Senedd member says “plenty of businesses" had been in touch with him saying they might be interested. “Plenty” is usefully vague - could mean two or 20 - and a passing mention of interest to a politician is very different to putting an offer to Aspro.
 
rob666 said:
Going back years to local am dram stuff, the plays are still protected, the actual characters etc aren't.
So Neverland and Peter Pan are permitted use, as long as you stay off the scripts.
Probably.
Click to expand...
Indeed:
www.gosh.org

Peter Pan copyright

Great Ormond Street Hospital
www.gosh.org www.gosh.org

John said:
If true, it could go some way to explaining the whole Dahl fiasco.
Click to expand...
Barrie died in 1937. Copyright would have lapsed in 1988 had the act not been adjusted just to protect Great Ormond Street.

Dahl died in 1990. Copyright expiration has subsequently been increased to 70 years after death, so Oakwood were about 44 years too soon to benefit from it.

Of course, this is just the original work; any derivative works or depictions like the illustrations will have different expiration schedules. The name "Roald Dahl" as well as many of the book titles are also protected by trademarks which can be renewed indefinitely. I never saw Dahl Land but I would guess they avoided these protected names at least?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top