disney and pixar being sued

trr1

trr1

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
did search but did not find

Pixar and Disney sued by Luxo
By Leah Zanolla
Sep 6, 2009

"Luxo Jr." is the hopping desk lamp that has been the mascot for Pixar since 1986. John Lasseter used his own Luxo desk lamp as a model for a short computer-animated movie, which was later nominated for an Academy Award.

Luxo, a Norwegian lamp maker, filed a federal lawsuit against Pixar and Disney saying their use of the name Luxo is infringing on the company's copyright. Disney-Pixar is including a limited edition "Luxo Jr." lamp along with Blue-ray discs of "Up." Luxo is also upset about the six-foot animatronic Luxo Jr. attraction at Disney's Hollywood Studios.

According to an article in the Los Angeles Times, "Oslo-based Luxo said in the complaint that the Luxo name hadn't been used on Pixar and Disney products until now and that sale of the Pixar lamps would cause devastating damage to Luxo and dilute the goodwill which Luxo has built up."
found here
http://www.wdwinfo.com/news/Television_and_Film/Pixar_and_Disney_sued_by_Luxo.htm
 
Tom

Tom

Beta Return
trr1 said:
did search but did not find

Pixar and Disney sued by Luxo
By Leah Zanolla
Sep 6, 2009

"Luxo Jr." is the hopping desk lamp that has been the mascot for Pixar since 1986. John Lasseter used his own Luxo desk lamp as a model for a short computer-animated movie, which was later nominated for an Academy Award.

Luxo, a Norwegian lamp maker, filed a federal lawsuit against Pixar and Disney saying their use of the name Luxo is infringing on the company's copyright. Disney-Pixar is including a limited edition "Luxo Jr." lamp along with Blue-ray discs of "Up." Luxo is also upset about the six-foot animatronic Luxo Jr. attraction at Disney's Hollywood Studios.

According to an article in the Los Angeles Times, "Oslo-based Luxo said in the complaint that the Luxo name hadn't been used on Pixar and Disney products until now and that sale of the Pixar lamps would cause devastating damage to Luxo and dilute the goodwill which Luxo has built up."
found here
http://www.wdwinfo.com/news/Television_and_Film/Pixar_and_Disney_sued_by_Luxo.htm
Click to expand...

I saw this online somewhere too - a news article. It seems odd to me that companies like Disney and Pixar - who have more attorneys per square foot than they do staff - would draw, animate and name a character after an existing product without knowing the consequences.

There's got to be some sort of agreement in place. This would obviously be copyright infringement, and there's no way the lawyers would have let them proceed this direction without compliance.

And contrary to their claim, Pixar's Juxo Jr could only increase sales of Luxo brand lamps. There is no negative publicity that could come from this.
 
trr1

trr1

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
edwardtc said:
I saw this online somewhere too - a news article. It seems odd to me that companies like Disney and Pixar - who have more attorneys per square foot than they do staff - would draw, animate and name a character after an existing product without knowing the consequences.

There's got to be some sort of agreement in place. This would obviously be copyright infringement, and there's no way the lawyers would have let them proceed this direction without compliance.

And contrary to their claim, Pixar's Juxo Jr could only increase sales of Luxo brand lamps. There is no negative publicity that could come from this.
Click to expand...
and why did it take luxo 20 years to complain and sue?
 
janoimagine

janoimagine

Well-Known Member
trr1 said:
and why did it take luxo 20 years to complain and sue?
Click to expand...

To use the Luxo name they would have had to had an agreement in place. My guess would be that they had no right/agreement to distribute the Lamps in the special edition of Up. I guess time will tell on this one. :shrug:
 
raven

raven

Well-Known Member
edwardtc said:
According to an article in the Los Angeles Times, "Oslo-based Luxo said in the complaint that the Luxo name hadn't been used on Pixar and Disney products until now and that sale of the Pixar lamps would cause devastating damage to Luxo and dilute the goodwill which Luxo has built up."
Click to expand...

:veryconfu Yeah because Disney/Pixar has such a bad reputation for bringing a horrible reputation to their guests and consumers. :rolleyes:
 
Dinoman96

Dinoman96

Well-Known Member
Slowpoke2.jpg


Now you know why...
 
unkadug

unkadug

Follower of "Saget"The Cult
raven said:
:veryconfu Yeah because Disney/Pixar has such a bad reputation for bringing a horrible reputation to their guests and consumers. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I can guarantee that the Disney Luxo lamp would not be the same quality of the Luxo produced lamp line. This would dilute the Luxo corporate name.

Disney had an agreement to use the Luxo name and likeness. Not an agreement to produce, package and/or distribute Luxo merchandise.
 
SirGoofy

SirGoofy

Member
Figment632 said:
I hated that crap!!!!!! Well crap is a good word because as long as WWE is TVPG it will be crap!
Click to expand...

I haven't watched since High School, and even towards the end of that things were pretty bad. The Rock was the WWF. When he left, everything went downhill.

Anyway, onto the OT, Disney never had the rights to make Luxo merch, so I get this.
 
Figment632

Figment632

New Member
SirGoofy said:
I haven't watched since High School, and even towards the end of that things were pretty bad. The Rock was the WWF. When he left, everything went downhill.

Anyway, onto the OT, Disney never had the rights to make Luxo merch, so I get this.
Click to expand...

Agreed but I was always more of an Austin fan than the Rock.
 
WDWFigment

WDWFigment

Well-Known Member
unkadug said:
I can guarantee that the Disney Luxo lamp would not be the same quality of the Luxo produced lamp line. This would dilute the Luxo corporate name.

Disney had an agreement to use the Luxo name and likeness. Not an agreement to produce, package and/or distribute Luxo merchandise.
Click to expand...

Dude, not cool. Why use logic when you can blindly defend Disney and claim that any opposition is somehow inappropriate or of poor character.

In all seriousness, he's exactly right. It's ironic how litigious Disney is towards individuals and organizations it believes is violating contractual obligations or intellectual property laws at a supposed harm to Disney, yet Disney itself plays very fast and loose with the law.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom