Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Yohan Yukiya Sese Cuneta 사요한🦣 (youronlyone@c.im)'s status on Tuesday, 02-Jan-2024 04:13:08 JST Yohan Yukiya Sese Cuneta 사요한🦣

   By the way, don't be confused between #Copyright and #Trademark. These two are totally different.

   Let's use Mickey and Minnie Mouse.

   While the earliest versions of Mickey Mouse and Minnie Mouse are now in the #PublicDomain it does not mean you can freely create and sell your own merchandise with them on it. That falls under Trademark.

   Copyright covers works of art like the character, the stories, literary works, music. In the Mickey and Minnie Mouse case, the images and stories, and the character art itself, are now in the Public Domain.

   However, using these characters as in a merchandise like mugs and t-shirts is not under Copyright, it is under Trademark. Disney still holds the Trademark rights for these characters.

   You can draw Mickey and Minnie. You can create new stories for them. Not only that, but you can write a new literary work, say a novel or a children's book or a film, based on the earliest versions of these characters. Just not anything that falls under Trademark.

   If you are going to do something that you think might fall under Trademark law, the best course of action is to ask #Disney. If they say it doesn't fall under Trademark law, then keep that reply, as it is your proof they gave you permission. Otherwise, try to negotiate if you really need it.

   So, again, Copyright (and in this case Public Domain) is totally different from Trademark. Many countries choose to call these two as #IntellectualPropertyRights. While it is correct (and confusing), they are different and there is no overlap between them. They have completely separate uses/coverage.

   #IANAL and #TINLA, however, it doesn't mean you can't study Copyright and Trademark laws.

   • Embed this notice
     Leth (lethargilistic@kolektiva.social)'s status on Thursday, 04-Jan-2024 00:43:27 JST Leth

     in reply to

     @youronlyone This is not true. Trademarks are more specific than this. They are the brand of the shirt; that is, they cover what the tag says to indicate the shirt's source. The image on the front of the shirt is copyrightable expression. You can't use a trademark to restrict the expressive use of a public domain character beyond the duration of a copyright.

     Yohan Yukiya Sese Cuneta 사요한🦣 repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Leth (lethargilistic@kolektiva.social)'s status on Thursday, 04-Jan-2024 00:43:34 JST Leth

     in reply to

     @youronlyone Moreover, Trademark law has its own fair use doctrine, so you're not categorically prohibited from using a trademark in your copyrighted expression, either.

     But the main point is that trademark exists to prevent competitors from misleading consumers as to the source of the product. If it doesn't indicate source and doesn't use Disney's trademark info on the tag, it's not trademark infringement.

   • Embed this notice
     Leth (lethargilistic@kolektiva.social)'s status on Thursday, 04-Jan-2024 00:43:38 JST Leth

     in reply to

     • radioactivestardust

     @bookstardust @youronlyone Yes, as long as your sticker is based on the public domain version of the character. You can make whatever changes you want that don't infringe on later, still-copyrighted versions of Disney's Mickey.

     And tarnishment specifically means that you're using *a mark you made* that is *similar to* the famous mark in a way that harms the reputation of the famous mark. The art on the sticker is not a mark, so it can't be tarnishment.

     (But I'm speaking from the American perspective, so the details might differ where you are.)

   • Embed this notice
     radioactivestardust (bookstardust@bildung.social)'s status on Thursday, 04-Jan-2024 00:43:39 JST radioactivestardust

     in reply to

     • Leth

     @lethargilistic @youronlyone so if it's not the actual Disney Photo and i am not acting like I am Disney (or harming the brand) it's fine.
     Let's say i make Stickers with Mickey Mouse and sell them in my etsy store, it's no problem.

     Yohan Yukiya Sese Cuneta 사요한🦣 repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Yohan Yukiya Sese Cuneta 사요한🦣 (youronlyone@c.im)'s status on Thursday, 04-Jan-2024 00:46:43 JST Yohan Yukiya Sese Cuneta 사요한🦣

     in reply to

     • Leth
     • radioactivestardust

     @lethargilistic Ahh, that's an interesting one. It's different from what I learned from training sessions regarding this topic; with the Mickey being the example.

     I guess at this point, the safest route is to just ask, so one has proof that they allowed it.

     @bookstardust

   • Embed this notice
     Yohan Yukiya Sese Cuneta 사요한🦣 (youronlyone@c.im)'s status on Thursday, 04-Jan-2024 00:55:35 JST Yohan Yukiya Sese Cuneta 사요한🦣

     in reply to

     • Leth
     • radioactivestardust

     @bookstardust You can make money from the Public Domain versions. For example, sell your art or animation/film that based on the Public Domain version (not the latter versions); and without implying it is Disney. So, maybe adding a fine print it is based on the Public Domain work is a good move to prove you're not claiming to be Disney and not deceiving people.

     It won't be surprising if Disney will do gymnastics just to “protect” their “brand”.

     Then again, as @lethargilistic mentioned, it's different in the US; and it should be fine as long as you used the Public Domain version.

     However, from where I live, Disney can use the “brand” angle and everything related to it.

     (As always, #IANAL and #TINALA. ^_^)

   • Embed this notice
     radioactivestardust (bookstardust@bildung.social)'s status on Thursday, 04-Jan-2024 00:55:37 JST radioactivestardust

     in reply to

     @youronlyone so basically you can use them, but not make money with it?

   • Embed this notice
     Yohan Yukiya Sese Cuneta 사요한🦣 (youronlyone@c.im)'s status on Thursday, 04-Jan-2024 01:03:59 JST Yohan Yukiya Sese Cuneta 사요한🦣

     in reply to

     • Leth
     • radioactivestardust

     @bookstardust Yep, that's true. Most especially Disney.

     They did everything to delay the early versions of Mickey and Minnie entering the Public Domain twice by 20 years each. And already “reminded” people that they will “protect their brand” as it has become their image, and it is their Trademark.

     It wouldn't be surprising if they already played different scenarios and already have a “bible” on what to do in each possible case. Disney is definitely not happy.

     @lethargilistic

   • Embed this notice
     radioactivestardust (bookstardust@bildung.social)'s status on Thursday, 04-Jan-2024 01:04:00 JST radioactivestardust

     in reply to

     • Leth

     @youronlyone @lethargilistic if you ask a big cooperation like Disney, they will say no. They are not happy that we can now freely use Mickey, why would the say yes, when you want to earn money with their character?

   • Embed this notice
     Yohan Yukiya Sese Cuneta 사요한🦣 (youronlyone@c.im)'s status on Thursday, 04-Jan-2024 01:10:09 JST Yohan Yukiya Sese Cuneta 사요한🦣

     in reply to

     • Leth
     • radioactivestardust

     @bookstardust Ouch, that's 4 more years, and also if Disney won't be allowed to extend it.

     I doubt Disney will ignore it. Since they're the #1 Rightsholder who'll do everything to prevent their assets from entering the Public Domain; and if it does, to make it very confusing for everyone.

     @lethargilistic

   • Embed this notice
     radioactivestardust (bookstardust@bildung.social)'s status on Thursday, 04-Jan-2024 01:10:11 JST radioactivestardust

     in reply to

     • Leth

     @youronlyone @lethargilistic Germany has the same issue, we are getting Micky Mouse for the public domain only in 2028, so i couldn't do it either way, unless the Americans go wyld with it, and Disney gives up bothering anyway