Check out the September 22, 2011 edition of the Lio comic strip:
Now, we’re all for comic strips making social commentary, and there definitely is a “fair use” clause in copyright law, but we can’t figure out what the heck the point of this strip is, therefore it’s not fair use because it’s not fair that we have to sit around wondering what it means!
Seriously, Mr. Comic Strip Artist, if you’re going to make ambiguous works of social satire, at least stick to public domain subjects. This comic would have been just as funny with Little Nemo, the Yellow Kid, Obadiah Oldbuck, or Gertie the Dinosaur!
An August 2011 episode of the animated television show Ugly Americans titled “Wail Street” included the following images:
This is obviously, definitely an attempt to depict Disneyland as a place to which demons go on vacation, and certainly it must have been created without Disney review and permission! How do we know this? Because of all the errors — things that certainly wouldn’t get past Disney’s crack legal review team!
For example (just to name a few):
- Mickey Mouse in the first picture is definitely off model. He looks like some kind of bizarre teleportation-device-failure mixture of our beloved Mickey and Richard Nixon.
- Doombuggies without rear shells? Please!
- The Mad Tea Party color scheme, seating arrangements, landscaping, and (judging from the arc of the spew) spin pattern are entirely wrong.
They may disdain valid copyrights, but have they also no respect for the truth? Particularly since this is a show targeted at children (it is a cartoon after all), that is just inexcusable!
We’re going to need some assistance with this one. We assume that this is a violation because it looks like it’s live action, and Mickey didn’t make any black-and-white live-action-and-cartoon films (he wasn’t in Walt’s Alice comedies, for example). Also, we’re extremely confident that Mickey never would perform in a film in which a woman was taking an actual naked shower, unless this was when he was very young and perhaps needed the money for college.
In any case, we’re pretty sure this is a violation, but will hold back our usual frothing ranting until someone can tell us for sure. Anyone?
One of our awesome, observant readers sent the following message:
Hi, I have been searching on ebay UK for Mickey Mouse merchandise and came across this ‘cd clock’ in a sellers ‘Animated clocks’ section, which I like, but feel it is possibly not official merchandise ? Please can you confirm or not, if it is, I shall purchase one.
Item no : 260651807916
Seller id : *o*krazydaisy*o*
Seller shop : Krazy Daisy
The Disney Copyright Violations crack research team (me) intensely investigated this item (we spent a couple minutes looking at UK eBay and a couple pages on the Krazy Daisy web site), and saw no evidence that this was an official Disney product. Rather, it appears to us to be a depressing abuse of our beloved Mickey Mouse, a creature so kind, caring, and loving that he would never do anything to harm even a single hair on another living being (except for in some of his early black-and-white work, but he was young then and needed the money).
So what is the tragedy here? That Mickey’s chest has been perforated by clockwork? That he is depicted without his beloved “©Disney” text? Or that the green kind of makes us think of seasickness? That is not for us to say.
What is for us to say is that if we’re totally wrong and this is indeed official Disney merchandise, we’re sorry. (It’s still ugly, though.)
An anonymous DCV visitor writes: “Superior Concierge in Kissimmee has purchased a Mickey costume and is appearing at local resorts such as Emerald Island and Terra Verde as seen in the newsletter attached.”
Let’s take a look at a photo and some text from the newsletter to see what’s going on here…
That certainly looks like Mickey Mouse to us, and we suppose that it could be a violation if Disney’s beloved mascot is being used to promote this particular enterprise, but we don’t want to jump to any conclusions. Who knows — perhaps Mickey is a member of the homeowner’s association and just wanted to spend some time with friends? Or he might have been in the area and heard that there was a free breakfast to be had? Or maybe Disney rents Mickey out for functions like this when there are slow days in the park? Maybe the mouse is just moonlighting to earn some extra cash so he can buy a ring and finally ask Minnie to marry him?
Then again, the newsletter says that other prominent Florida attractions (Pirates Adventure Dinner Show, Boggy Creek Airboat Rides, Gatorland, and others) were in attendance to promote their businesses, so maybe Disney just wanted to make sure they were numbered among their peers?
So, without additional information and thousands of dollars in legal fees we can’t definitively call this a violation. Of course, if it is, we certainly hope that those responsible will suffer the agonies of eternal hellfire for leaving the false impression that our beloved Mickey himself supports their business.
This photo was posted on the Picture is Unrelated blog. I think it’s supposed to be Mickey Mouse from the Star Trek mirror universe, but since Disney’s copyrights have jurisdiction in all possible worlds, this is a horrifying violation, no matter what universe it is in!
No idea what this thing is, but I found it here.
All of these horrible mutations of Disney’s treasured commercial property were found on Coolest Birthday Cakes.
It is possible that this is two Disney copyright violations in one! The cake appears to be a cross between Mickey Mouse and Remy from Ratatouille. It was discovered on Coolest Birthday Cakes.
Do these people really think they can get away with trying to convince the innocent that they have received a bonified holiday card from Mickey and Minnie? I think not!
This deceptive bit of holiday joy was found at Scott & Bev’s Homemade Greeting Cards.