Disney failed to win the rights to Pooh Characters

napnet

Active Member
Original Poster
The Walt Disney Co. lost a round at the U.S. Supreme Court in a 15-year-old legal feud with the company that owns the merchandising rights to Winnie the Pooh characters.

The court, without comment, turned away an appeal by Clare Milne, granddaughter of Pooh creator A.A. Milne. She and Disney have been working together to wrest rights away from Stephen Slesinger Inc., which traces its stake in the Pooh characters to a 1930 agreement with A.A. Milne.

Disney, based in Burbank, Calif., was seeking to end its obligation to pay royalties to Slesinger. In a separate case, Slesinger contends Disney underpaid royalties by hundreds of millions of dollars over the past two decades.

English author A.A. Milne sold the rights to his Pooh creations in 1930 to Stephen Slesinger, a New York literary agent. When Slesinger died in 1953, the rights passed to his widow, Shirley. In 1961, she agreed to license the rights to Disney in return for a cut of the company's revenue from merchandise sales.

At the Supreme Court, Clare Milne sought to invoke a provision in federal copyright law that lets family members of authors recapture the rights to works that prove unexpectedly popular.

A federal appeals court said that legal provision didn't apply because of a 1983 renegotiation of the Pooh rights. That agreement involved Disney, the Slesinger company and Christopher Robin Milne, who is A.A.'s son and Clare's father.

Disney, which didn't formally take part in Clare Milne's appeal, is paying her legal expenses, Slesinger said in court papers. The copyrights for Milne's four Pooh books expire about 2020. A Disney spokesman said Monday that the company had no comment on the court's ruling.


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/busi...794.story?coll=orl-business-headlines-tourism
 

wedway71

Well-Known Member
Im kinda confused with this.Does this just mean that Disney will have to pay royalties to them and will be able to keep Pooh or will they loose the right to keep Pooh all together?
 
The title of this post does not fully represent the subject matter of the article or the court ruling mentioned within it. That's probably, in part, why it seems confusing.

Disney did not "fail to win the rights to Pooh Characters" in any way, shape, or form. Disney fully owns the world-wide merchandising rights to Pooh and all other characters through merchandising contracts with SSI.

The above lawsuit delt with an heir of A.A. Milne attempting to undo the original agreement between Milne and SSI. This individual wanted to recapture the merchandising rights that A.A. Milne granted to SSI prior to his death. SSI "subleased" these rights to the Walt Disney Co. in exchange for royalty payments. The Supreme Court simply ruled that the original contracts remaine valid (SSI subleasing to Disney) and that the heir of A.A. Milne could not recapture the rights to the characters.

The whole reason for this challenge to the SSI rights to Pooh was an attempt to stop other litigation filed by SSI against Disney. SSI claims that Disney didn't fully pay royalties on all merchandise they sold with the Pooh character. Disney denies this. That litigation was thrown out last year and appeals have been denied to SSI. Disney, saw the Milne heir challenge to SSI's rights to Pooh as another way to stop the original SSI v. Disney lawsuit.

Since the royalties lawsuit was thrown out by the courts, the challenge against SSI's rights to Pooh really has little, if any, effect on Pooh and/or Disney.

Here's more info:
http://www.svmedialaw.com/content-9th-circuit-rules-in-winniethepooh-case.html
 

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

Back
Top Bottom