News Mickey vs Morgan & Morgan

[jah4955]

Did Morgan & Morgan violate Trademark?

I have studied this issue profusely twice: first in the late nineties thru a major research paper in college & second right before "Steamboat Willie" entered public domain. As much as I don't like that they can do this ad, my informed opinion is that Morgan & Morgan can legally do this (I want to be wrong!). Thoughts?

https://.com/2025/09/morgan-morgan-files-lawsuit-steamboat-willie-ad/

 

[DisneyHead123]

I can't say I know a lot about this - just looked it up when I saw your post - but it looks like the immediate issue is whether or not Disney needs to preemptively state if they plan on suing for copyright violation. I've never heard of anything like that and it certainly doesn't sound right to me, but I'm not a lawyer.

Regarding whether or not they can use the Steamboat Willie - I mean they didn't go after the Blood and Honey people, so I'm assuming there's not a lot that they can do there. My best guess would be that if there's a legal angle to be found, it's for defamation - even if Steamboat Willie is not copyrighted, perhaps you could argue that such a commercial unfairly portrays Disney in a negative light. Again, though, I'd think if there was an argument to be made there they would have done it for Blood and Honey.

 

[jah4955]

I can't say I know a lot about this - just looked it up when I saw your post - but it looks like the immediate issue is whether or not Disney needs to preemptively state if they plan on suing for copyright violation. I've never heard of anything like that and it certainly doesn't sound right to me, but I'm not a lawyer.

Regarding whether or not they can use the Steamboat Willie - I mean they didn't go after the Blood and Honey people, so I'm assuming there's not a lot that they can do there. My best guess would be that if there's a legal angle to be found, it's for defamation - even if Steamboat Willie is not copyrighted, perhaps you could argue that such a commercial unfairly portrays Disney in a negative light. Again, though, I'd think if there was an argument to be made there they would have done it for Blood and Honey.

Agreed. My understanding is that they are free to use the (currently) 1928 or 1929 likenesses of Minnie, Mickey, etc., provided that the viewer realizes that the use was not from Disney (hence, why Disney didn't "push back" with all the slasher flicks with 1928 Mickey and 1926 Pooh). Disney continues to use SW in brand-new merchandising, etc., and they're making that brand-new Oswald series, even though all the Disney-made silents have been in public domain since at least last year.

 

[DisDude33]

Did Morgan & Morgan violate Trademark?

I have studied this issue profusely twice: first in the late nineties thru a major research paper in college & second right before "Steamboat Willie" entered public domain. As much as I don't like that they can do this ad, my informed opinion is that Morgan & Morgan can legally do this (I want to be wrong!). Thoughts?

https://.com/2025/09/morgan-morgan-files-lawsuit-steamboat-willie-ad/

As far as I can tell Morgan and Morgan is just requesting that Disney respond to a clarification request that their ad doesn’t violate any trademarks or copyrights before they use it but Disney hasn’t responded yet because once they give the all clear they can’t later decide that any possible violation has occurred and then decide to sue.

I mean they didn't go after the Blood and Honey people

So Winnie the Pooh is a tricky one for Disney because technically their version of Pooh is still copyrighted but since the first two books in the series (which is where most of Disney’s original Pooh movie gets its story from) are now public domain there are only certain situations where Disney can go after something like Blood and Honey.

 

[Comped]

This is just John Morgan being unusually CHA. Considering his history with the company I don't think he would back down from Something much more substantial in terms of velocity against them, let alone something as weirdly pedestrian as this. No big deal.

 

[jah4955]

As far as I can tell Morgan and Morgan is just requesting that Disney respond to a clarification request that their ad doesn’t violate any trademarks or copyrights before they use it but Disney hasn’t responded yet because once they give the all clear they can’t later decide that any possible violation has occurred and then decide to sue.


So Winnie the Pooh is a tricky one for Disney because technically their version of Pooh is still copyrighted but since the first two books in the series (which is where most of Disney’s original Pooh movie gets its story from) are now public domain there are only certain situations where Disney can go after something like Blood and Honey.

Yes. I've noticed other companies selling 1926 WtP merch starting 2022ish bc of the different dynamics. Mickey is more "black and white"

 

[dlfan1313]

This is all going to be such a cluster f&2k. (Sorry i legitimately can't conceive a more appropriate phrase.)