09.25.2003
Was talking with Nate recently about how it would be fun to have a cartoon about a copyrighted character who has no freedom, and who is never allowed to grow or change - who is basically trapped in his job - but who is perpetually, and tragically, hopeful, since that happens to be one of his brand attributes. He’d say things like, “they’re introducing me to China! Maybe this will be my chance to try something new!” But then, like the Trix rabbit, he’d always be thwarted. We could call him Mark the Mouse or something (Nate suggested “Mouse the Mark”). It was such a funny idea, we decided to search around a little bit, and came across this interview with Mickey Mouse that came out the week after the Eldred decision, which a lot of people apparently blogged, but which we’d never seen, so maybe some of you missed it as well. Anyway, it’s got Mickey expressing a lot of the things we’d have wanted, although he’s a lot more jaded and aware of his situation than Mark the Mouse would ever be. So now, if we did the cartoon, whose copyright would we be infringing on?
comments 6Good idea, Abe! But “a gay Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny”? Isn’t that redundant? There’s a reason Mickey and Minnie still aren’t married, you know. And Bugs has kissed more boys in his cartoons (not to mention the cross-dressing) than Minnie ever has. I’d love to see them do R&J, espcially if they did it the Elizabethan way - Bugs always looked great in drag, to the confusion of WWII G.I.s everywhere, I’m sure.
You wouldn’t be infringing anyone’s copyright. As far as the interview goes, it’s just the same idea, which is uncopyrightable. Even if you got the idea to do the cartoon after seeing the interview, as long as you didn’t copy the interview into your drawing, you’d be fine. It would be your original expression of the idea.
Disney, who has sued preschoolers for infringement, may sue you, but the criticism would absolutely be a fair use. As far as trademark infringement, there is no likelihood that the average consumer would be confused and think Disney was the source of the parody, so you’d also be safe. Of course, these are just defenses, and you still have to pay the legal fees to put them forward.
Posted by sis at September 26, 2003 09:09 AMYep its redundant Tim, but the families have done a good job keeping it all unspoken, not good for the sales in Peroria you know… Bugs of course is a big time player, Mickey might have fallen for the wrong rabbit.
Posted by Abe at September 26, 2003 09:39 AMI love this whole new sister in law school thing.
Posted by Tim at September 26, 2003 02:50 PMPop loves the “whole new sister in law school” thing, as well.
Posted by POP at September 26, 2003 07:27 PMmore shey.net
09.24.2003: mainlining politics
Dean vs. Clark? Eyes on the prize, guys…
09.26.2003: bugs buddy
This is your Teddy Ruxpin on crack.
very nice, I always wanted to do a reworking of Romeo and Juliet as a cartoon starring a gay Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunney. They fell in love during Roger Rabbit, you can see it in Mickey’s eyes as they fall together… Disney and WB get to be the families trying to keep the tragic lovers apart…
Posted by Abe at September 25, 2003 11:38 PM