# Is there any precedent for Mickey Mouse going out of copyright? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [June 29, 2017, 8:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120 "2017-06-29T08:25:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2017, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/21 "2017-06-30T16:11:06Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Here’s a fun [article on lost trademarks](https://consumerist.com/2014/07/19/15-product-trademarks-that-have-become-victims-of-genericization/), including many that few people know ever were trademarks. Great link. I knew most of those, though it’s good to be reminded. But “tarmac”? I thought that was a straight up abbreviation of “tar macadam”. Which I suppose it still is, I just never had any clue it was trademarked in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2017, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/22 "2017-06-30T16:59:05Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > So yeah, there’s going to be another copyright extension before _Steamboat Willie_ goes PD. What do you think will happen to Disney if Steamboat Willie goes into public domain? Do you think the day after that happens Target will be able to sell Mickey Mouse t-shirts without paying Disney? Disney will not lose Mickey Mouse as a trademark. Mickey Mouse will remain a Disney trademark, and so you won’t be able to sell Mickey Mouse t-shirts, or open Mickey Mosuse Coffee Shop. The only thing that will change is that Steamboat Willie will be on Youtube and so anyone who wants will be able to see an ancient black and white cartoon for free. There will not be a copyright extension push by Disney to prevent the disaster of Steamboat Willie falling into public domain, because Steamboat Willie falling into public domain will not be a disaster for Disney. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2017, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/23 "2017-06-30T17:43:11Z")
Well, they probably would prefer to hold onto the exclusive rights, and so will exert at least some effort to make it happen. If nothing else, _Steamboat Willie_ going public domain will give a lot of people the wrong impression and thus make their job of defending their trademark that much harder. But you’re right that it’s hardly a major threat to them, the way that losing their trademark would be. > [@](#): > > Quoth **DrCube** : > > Great link. I knew most of those, though it’s good to be reminded. But “tarmac”? I thought that was a straight up abbreviation of “tar macadam”. Which I suppose it still is, I just never had any clue it was trademarked in the first place. The one that surprises me is “adrenaline”. What _else_ would you call the hormone produced by the adrenal glands? Epinephrine, apparently, and if you had asked me which of those two was a trademarked brand name, I’d have gotten it wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2017, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/24 "2017-06-30T17:44:48Z")
> [@Tom\_Tildrum](#): > > The whole point of IP protection is to stop other people from using it. There would certainly be significant financial consequences for Disney if Wal-Mart and Target could create and sell their own lines of clothing with Mickey and Minnie without paying license fees to Disney, or if Nick Jr. could produce its own Mickey Mouse Club, or if Six Flags could have Disney cartoon characters and princesses walking around its parks. The real question is how much of a hit Disney would take in the impossible event of losing its trademark on Mickey. Here’s an [article](http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-where-disney-really-makes-money-2015-1)that shows that merchandise accounted for less than 10% of its total revenues in 2014. There are over 100 categories of Disney merchandise, so clothing is a small percentage of that. Even if you add in some of the money that comes from theme parks, which I assume includes Mickey memorabilia, I don’t see how Mickey could directly contribute even $1 billion in revenue, or, as I said earlier, less than rounding error. Other companies being able to use the Mouse would cut into that figure but certainly not eliminate it entirely. They might conceivably expand the pie from people wanting authentic Disney-brand clothing. In short, the impossible wouldn’t significantly hurt the Disney Corporation. The likely wouldn’t even be a noticeable ding. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2017, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/25 "2017-06-30T17:51:51Z")
Other people horning in on the merchandise gig isn’t the only harm that they could suffer. Suppose, for instance, a tobacco company ran ads saying “Hey, kids, Mickey says that you should smoke Mouse-brand cigarettes!”? OK, that specific example would fall afoul of tobacco-advertising laws, so substitute something else just as reprehensible (or viewed as reprehensible). Now imagine what effect that might have on mothers deciding whether to buy any Disney-related, with or without Mickey in it: “No way am I paying for my kids to see that new movie! Have you seen what Disney is advertising? There will probably be some insidious messages in there, too; I wouldn’t want my kids watching that filth for any price!”. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2017, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/26 "2017-06-30T20:02:24Z")
Just a data point. [ComicMix Vindicated in Dr. Seuss Lawsuit Over Literary Mash-Up; Judge Dismisses Trademark Claims, Copyright Claim Will “Boldly Go Forward”](http://www.comicmix.com/2017/06/12/comicmix-vindicated-in-dr-seuss-lawsuit-over-literary-mash-up/) > [@](#): > > On Friday, June 9, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California partially granted ComicMix LLC’s motion to dismiss the Dr. Seuss estate’s copyright and trademark infringement lawsuit over the book Oh, the Places You’ll Boldly Go! To prevent publication, Dr. Seuss Enterprises, LP filed the lawsuit in 2016 against the book’s publisher ComicMix, its author David Gerrold, illustrator Ty Templeton, and Glenn Hauman, ComicMix’s co-founder and vice-president. > > United States District Judge Janis Sammartino dismissed the trademark claims under the doctrine of nominative fair use, and largely agreed with ComicMix’s position that fair use protects the book from copyright infringement claims. Judge Sammartino found that the book is “a highly transformative work that takes no more than necessary [from Dr. Seuss’s books] to accomplish its transformative purpose and will not impinge on the original market for Plaintiff’s underlying work.” She emphasized that the case has broader significance: “This case presents an important question regarding the emerging ‘mash-up’ culture where artists combine two independent works in a new and unique way. … Applying the fair use factors in the manner Plaintiff outlines would almost always preclude a finding of fair use under these circumstances. However, if fair use was not viable in a case such as this, an entire body of highly creative work would be effectively foreclosed.” ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2017, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/27 "2017-06-30T20:11:49Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > I got interrupted earlier; there’s an important point I didn’t get to. > > Say that Disney loses not just copyright on Mickey Mouse but trademarks rights as well. What are the “farther ranging consequences” for the corporation as compared to the individuals that leaper thinks have it easier? > > None. This is a serious error of logic. Disney’s annual revenue is over $55 billion dollars. Its market cap is $168 billion. How much of that would Disney lose? My guess is less than the rounding to the nearest billion I made… I dont think they fight it just for the money. There are enuf disney haters out there for people to make hay out of turning Mickey into a hated and despised icon. And, _what good does it do the public_ to let Mickey go out of Trademark/Copyright? ---
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2017, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/28 "2017-07-01T05:23:12Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > I dont think they fight it just for the money. There are enuf disney haters out there for people to make hay out of turning Mickey into a hated and despised icon. Yeah, ISIS might put him on their flag. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2017, 10:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/29 "2017-07-01T10:53:22Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > That doesn’t mean you’ll be able to sell Mickey Mouse branded merch, because Mickey is a trademark of Disney. Yes, but, from what I understand, you will be able to use Mickey in your own works, similar to how Wicked can use the Oz characters or everyone else uses Sherlock Holmes. You just would be unable to use his image to sell the merchandise. You would also be able to remix the existing film into anything. Not being able to do so is a lot of the problem people have with copyright these days. Fan fiction is at the mercy of the copyright holder. I mean, that’s how it works with other trademarks. I can write a story that has Coca Cola in it, without falling afoul of the company’s trademark. As long as I do not give the implication that Coca Cola sponsored my work or use it in my my advertising, I can even sell the book. Otherwise trademark effectively does become a perpetual copyright. Because copyright does in fact protect characters from being copied, even if you don’t copy the work they came from. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2017, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/30 "2017-07-01T13:07:10Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > What do you think will happen to Disney if Steamboat Willie goes into public domain? _Steamboat Willie_ is the line in the sand for Disney. Many other Disney productions soon follow. They aren’t protecting one film, they are protecting many, many more. (I can’t believe I have to explicitly state this.) Note that _The Jazz Singer_ came out the year before. Sound motion pictures have a much greater value than the silents. (Many of which were lost anyway for a lot of reasons including nitrate film stock.) Hence the key aspect of _Steamboat Willie_ being a synchronized sound cartoon. 1928 or so is a general turning point that all studios want to protect. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2017, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/31 "2017-07-01T15:32:36Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > _Steamboat Willie_ is the line in the sand for Disney. Many other Disney productions soon follow. > > They aren’t protecting one film, they are protecting many, many more. > > (I can’t believe I have to explicitly state this.) > > Note that _The Jazz Singer_ came out the year before. Sound motion pictures have a much greater value than the silents. (Many of which were lost anyway for a lot of reasons including nitrate film stock.) Hence the key aspect of _Steamboat Willie_ being a synchronized sound cartoon. 1928 or so is a general turning point that all studios want to protect. How much money are they making now from their monopoly on distribution? ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2017, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/32 "2017-07-01T19:30:33Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > How much money are they making now from their monopoly on distribution? From _all_ their films? Quite a bit, of course. Hence it is important to protect them _all_. Why the question??? ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2017, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/33 "2017-07-01T19:31:44Z")
> [@ftg](#): > > From _all_ their films? Quite a bit, of course. Hence it is important to protect them _all_. > > Why the question??? This is not how real businesses make decisions. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2017, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/34 "2017-07-01T23:59:41Z")
They’re making a ton of money on _Frozen_ and _Beauty and the Beast_, but those aren’t going out of copyright for a very long time now, so they don’t care much about that. _Steamboat Willie_ will go out of copyright fairly soon, but they don’t make much money off of it, so they don’t care much about that, either. Eventually, _Frozen_ and _Beauty and the Beast_ will go out of copyright, too, but by the time that happens, those probably won’t be making much money either, and they’ll have some other, newer properties that are still making them lots of money. You seem to be assuming that, as soon as _Steamboat_ goes, the rest will come tumbling down like a house of cards the very next day. They won’t. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2017, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/35 "2017-07-02T01:23:24Z")
People always look at one side of the monetary equation when fulminating on the Internet. What about the other side? Copyright can only be changed by Congress. (Ignore that nothing is coming out of Congress these days.) How many years of effort, lobbying, commentary, and bad press would need to go into changing the Copyright Act again? (Look at what happened with net neutrality, worth tens of billions.) What is the cost of even making the case, let alone funding it for all the time needed, compared to the value of selling a few old movies? Why would corporations even think this was a positive monetary transaction? Copyrights on movies just aren’t worth very much _ninety-five years_ after their release. If you have the properties now, then they’re basically free money. The equation is very different if you have to spend money to continue their worth. Why isn’t that being considered? ---
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2017, 6:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/36 "2017-07-02T06:57:41Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > They’re making a ton of money on _Frozen_ and _Beauty and the Beast_, but those aren’t going out of copyright for a very long time now, so they don’t care much about that. > > _Steamboat Willie_ will go out of copyright fairly soon, but they don’t make much money off of it, so they don’t care much about that, either. > > Eventually, _Frozen_ and _Beauty and the Beast_ will go out of copyright, too, but by the time that happens, those probably won’t be making much money either, and they’ll have some other, newer properties that are still making them lots of money. > > You seem to be assuming that, as soon as _Steamboat_ goes, the rest will come tumbling down like a house of cards the very next day. They won’t. Plus there’s all the royalties they pay to Andersen’s and Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de **[Villeneuve’s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabrielle-Suzanne_Barbot_de_Villeneuve)** estates \* for swiping and mucking up their tales because Disney scum are too incompetent and dumb to create their own stuff. **The Snow Queen** in particular is one of the glories of European Literature, not mindless entertainment for little girls of all ages and all sexes. - With special residuals to Jeanne-Marie Leprince de **[Beaumont](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne-Marie_Leprince_de_Beaumont)** who abridged Mme. Villeneuve’s _ **Beauty** _. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2017, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/37 "2017-07-02T16:02:27Z")
> [@Evan\_Drake](#): > > Plus there’s all the royalties they pay to Andersen’s and Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de **[Villeneuve’s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabrielle-Suzanne_Barbot_de_Villeneuve)** estates \* for swiping and mucking up their tales because Disney scum are too incompetent and dumb to create their own stuff. > **The Snow Queen** in particular is one of the glories of European Literature, not mindless entertainment for little girls of all ages and all sexes. > > - With special residuals to Jeanne-Marie Leprince de **[Beaumont](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne-Marie_Leprince_de_Beaumont)** who abridged Mme. Villeneuve’s _ **Beauty** _. Hmm. Looks to me as if Disney is just following the grand historic tradition you seem to approve of. > [@](#): > > After her death, Villeneuve’s tale was abridged, rewritten, and published by Jeanne-Marie Leprince de Beaumont in 1756 in her Magasin des enfants to teach young English girls a moral lesson. In her widely popular publication, she gave no credit to Villeneuve as the author of La Belle et la Bête and thus Leprince de Beaumont is often referred to as the author of this famous fairytale.[4] Her shortened version is the one most commonly known today.[2] ---
**Author:** ![drewder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/57b2e6/32.png) [@drewder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewder)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2017, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/38 "2017-07-02T17:45:09Z")
Mickey might be safe as a trademark since Mickey is so tightly associated with Disney but some of the other characters, and characters from other owners, might not be so lucky. [Mickey’s Headed to the Public Domain! But Will He Go Quietly? - Office of Copyright](http://copyright.nova.edu/mickey-public-domain/) ---
**Author:** ![Trancephalic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/trancephalic/32/380_2.png) [@Trancephalic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trancephalic)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2017, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/39 "2017-07-02T18:12:22Z")
> [@drewder](#): > > Mickey might be safe as a trademark since Mickey is so tightly associated with Disney but some of the other characters, and characters from other owners, might not be so lucky. [Mickey’s Headed to the Public Domain! But Will He Go Quietly? - Office of Copyright](http://copyright.nova.edu/mickey-public-domain/) Steamboat Willie wasn’t Mickey Mouse’s debut; it was Plane Crazy. Secondly Winnie the Pooh wore a red shirt in the original E. H. Shepard illustrations. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2017, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120/40 "2017-07-02T21:37:59Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > This is not how real businesses make decisions. (Here we go again!) No, this is _exactly_ how businesses make decisions. Can you imagine a meeting at Disney? Farnsworth: We’re not making much money at all on these old toons. Let’s let them lapse into the public domain. Big Boss: Didn’t we use to someone named Farnsworth working here? Wonder whatever happened to him. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-any-precedent-for-mickey-mouse-going-out-of-copyright/790120.md?page=3)