I forsee a Trademark problem that many didn’t expect, and Disney trying to defend their copyright by saying that they used the same version in a Mickey Mouse cartoon in 2023.
Yes, they did. Before that, LEGO also released blind bag minifigures for Steamboat Willie and Minnie Mouse. I’m currently designing a LEGO MOC to display my figures with a small rendition of the Steamboat Willie boat. (I purchase my parts used from BrickLink to reduce costs.)
In 2013 Walt Disney Animation Studios released a theatrical short called “Get a Horse!” which features 1920s era Mickey complete with archival audio of Walt as Mickey (and others who voiced him then) as well as renditions of other classic era Disney characters including Minnie, Pete, Horace, and Oswald. Heck, even the logo for WDAS in that sort is Mickey whistling in Steamboat Willie.
It’s a pretty decent short too, even if you know nothing about Disney. And it played before Frozen in the cinema, 4th highest-grossing animation of all time.
I remember at the time thinking whether they might be doing it to try and protect their rights. I’m no lawyer though.
I foresaw the trademark thing and so have many others. But that doesn’t restrict as much as the recently-expired copyright does. Mostly the continuing trademark means that one can’t use the Steamboat Willie Mickey Mouse in a way that misleads people that your own work is by Disney.
About the thing about Disney claiming that because they used Steamboat Willie Mickey in more recent woks they can still claim copyright protections on elements of Mickey Mouse that were a thing in Steamboat Willie, I really don’t think copyright works like that.
All that said, Disney has a rabid legal team and lots of experience at lobbying congress. Who knows what they’re capable of. It’s possible they’d try to pull some major fast one and make copyright and/or trademark work differently than they do today.
I foresaw the trademark thing About the thing about Disney claiming that because they used Steamboat Willie Mickey in more recent woks they can still claim copyright protections on elements of Mickey Mouse that were a thing in Steamboat Willie, I really don’t think copyright works like that.
Mickey in Steamboat Willie just looks… odd.
The ‘normal’ Mickey is still under copyright so not a lot was gained through Steambiat Willie losing copyright protection.
Sure it would be nice if we coud use more modern elements of Mickey. But I don’t agree that this isn’t a big deal.
Before 2019, one couldn’t have blamed us for expecting nothing to ever pass into the public domain again. Steamboat Willie would have passed into the public domain in 1955 had 13 distinct acts of Congress (prompted by lobbiests from, among others, Disney) between the years 1976 and 1998 not extended copyright each time Steamboat Willie came close to entering the public domain. The last one in 1998, the “Sonny Bono” Copyright Term Extension Act was called by its detractors at the time the “Mickey Mouse Protection Act.” Basically Mickey Mouse and Steamboat Willie are probably the most emblematic works in any conversation of copyright run amok. So, if nothing else, the copyright expiring on Steamboat Willie is a hugely symbolic occurrence.
But also, it’s not as if people aren’t using Mickey in works already. I’ve seen several web comics just here on Lemmy. And there’s a video game in the works.
I’d love to see WB do something – anything – with the Steamboat Willie version of Mickey Mouse.
And finally, does Steamboat Willie Mickey really look that different from more modern Mickey renditions? The eyes are probably the biggest difference. But also realize that now that Steamboat Willie (and at least one other early Mickey Mouse animation) is in the public domain, there’s room for other modern-looking reimaginings of Mickey Mouse that might differ from the modern Disney Mickey Mouse.
Doing that for Trademark law is why they didn’t bother lobbying for longer copyright this time. They could protect their Mouse trademark without relying on Steamboat Willy like they did before.
Actually SCOTUS ruled that extending the copyright pulls it out of public domain in Golan v Holder. Congress passed a law that put some literary and musical works back into copyright from the public domain. A case was brought by some educators and musicians that the removal of these works from the public domain infri get on their free speech, but the Court disagreed 6-2.
A trademark (also written trade mark or trade-mark[1]) is a type of intellectual property consisting of a recognizable sign, design, or expression that identifies a product or service from a particular source and distinguishes it from others.[2][3]
I would say an animated intro isn’t a trademark, and even then making a movie with that material isn’t copying someone’s trademark for your trademark. But this could get interesting.
I mean they just need to slap a ™ on every official appearence of Mickey. Hell, they can easily say an abstract representstion of Mickey’s ears represent Disney and they wouldn’t even be wrong.
This is pushing my knowledge but trademark infringement would be if you use their logo as your logo. You can’t mislead people into thinking your product comes from them. That doesn’t mean you can’t ever have public domain things in your product.
Add comment