Tuesday, October 17, 2017
Disney Fights Unlicensed 'Star Wars,' 'Frozen' Characters at Children's Birthday Parties
Hollywood Reporter: Yes, Hollywood studios tend to be fiercely protective of their intellectual property. These studios will often sue over unlicensed merchandise in the marketplace. Usually, these cases go away quickly and quietly. The defendants tend not to have the resources to fight back. Settlements and stipulated judgments are the norm. Well, not this time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Copyright laws are rightfully strict! The article mentions that these cases are usually quick and undetected, so its really surprising to me that all of a sudden this case is being blown up. Most of this article very candidly describes the ridiculousness which is Characters for Hire, LLC.. They talk about the cheap changes, for example: "Star Wars storyline' to 'Star Battles story line', which to me is highly confusing, because its just such a cheap knock off, that I'm surprised they weren't sued earlier. I understand that its very easy to get away with these infringements and make some good money, but as the article states it tarnishes the legitimacy of the original characters and brand name of the stories. Nowadays, anything could be trademarked and copyrighted, so Disney has a lot to play with when it comes to this lawsuit and I suspect this will be a huge loss, if not the end of Characters for Hire, LLC.
It'll be very interesting to see how this lawsuit plays out, as I know that these kinds of "characters for hire" businesses have spread massively across the states in the past few years. I would find it difficult for them to rule that this particular business would be operating illegally without addressing the Times Square characters, as the article points out, because it seems that its a very similar situation, at least in the sense that they are presenting perhaps low-quality copies of the characters regardless of whether or not they are licensed through Disney. I really feel as though this case is going to go in favor of Disney, considering the fact that these small businesses are making profits directly through the licensing of these characters, but I think its a ruling that would be difficult to enforce, because these businesses tend to have a very low profile in terms of online presence.
Disney is at it again. Trying to squash the little guys dreams. But in this case, they could not be more wrong. The most likely reason that Disney does not go after those costume characters in times sq is because they have no way of knowing net worth like they do with CFH. CFH is a business that must file tax returns annually and can therefor provide for Disney lawyers the net worth of the company to use as a determination to pursue a lawsuit. Regardless of the name changes to the characters or the descriptions, Disney is still on the wrong side here. The company, CFH, clearly states that they are in no way associated and should not be confused with the Disney company. Full stop. But Disney won’t have it. Once they have tasted blood and see a potential for any money from a suit or settlement, they don’t back down. It’s simple corporate greed driving here and unless Disney has seen these characters in person, there is no way to determine what level of performance quality is given, so they don’t get to claim that these are “poor quality appearances and performances”. CFH may employ highly skilled or trained actors who do this as side jobs. Instead of suing, maybe Disney should set up a division to license companies like CFH. It could be a franchise agreement that would provide the rights Disney seeks to costumes, characters, and merchandise. A win-win for both parties. Disney can claim ownership and collect a small profit and the company can also collect a profit. This way, everyone get’s a slice of pie, or in this case, cake.
Post a Comment