Los Angeles (AP) – Walt Disney Company on Wednesday sued a Hong Kong Jewelery Company, alleging that the illegal Mickey Mouse jewelry is sold.
The International Media and Entertainment Group filed a case against the Red Earth Group in the federal court at Los Angeles, which sells online jewelry under the name Satir.
Disney says that the marketing and branding of the ring, necklaces and earrings in Satro’s “Mickey 1928 Collection” violates its trademark rights and the Hong Kong company is deliberately trying to fool customers to think that pieces are official disney goods.
Satro, the suit alleged, “Mickey Mouse intends to present her as her brand identifier for her jewelry goods and” wants to trade Mickey Mouse trademark and consumer’s affinity for Disney and its prestigious ambassador Mickey Mouse. ,
A message seeking comments from representatives of the Red Earth Group was not immediately responded to.
The lawsuit is a sign of Disney’s dogd efforts to protect its intellectual property from unauthorized appropriation. However the first version of Mickey Mouse enters public domain Last year after Disney’s copyright, the company still holds a trademark rights for the character.
Disney’s lawyers argue in the suit that online marketing efforts of Red Earth “Mickey Mouse Trademark with Language and massive trade on the Disney brand” including describing jewelry for “Disney enthusiasts”.
Such a strategy indicates that the red earth “was deliberately trying to confuse consumers,” says the lawsuit. This imprint has been created, it says, “Suggestions, at least, a partnership or collaboration with Disney.”
Quickly Mickey Mouse depictionWho first appeared publicly in the film “Steamboat Willie” in 1928, now in the American public domain. The widely publicized moment was considered a milestone in publicly known icography.
The case alleged that the Red Earth and Satir are trying to use the situation as “Russia”, to suggest that the jewelry is legal, by saying “Mickey 1928 Collection” and saying that it is being sold in tribute to the first presence of the mouse.
The focal point of the collection is, the suit says, a piece of jewelry is marketed as “Satir Mickey 1928 Classic Ring”, with a steamboat willie Charm that is sitting on a band holding a synthetic stone.
But there is an essential difference between copyright – which protects the functions of art – and trademarks – which protects the brand of a company.
Even if a character is in a public domain, it cannot be used on the goods in such a way that it is from the company with the trademark, as Disney alleges that the red is doing the red meaning.
Disney said in a statement on Wednesday, “Disney is committed to guarding against illegal trademark violations and to protect consumers from confusion due to unauthorized uses of Mickey Mouse and our other reputed characters.”
The lawsuit wants an prohibition with monetary damage to sell jewelry against the red Earth or along with monetary damage in some other way on the trademark of Disney.
Andrew Dalton, Associated Press