LOS ANGELES (AP) — The Walt Disney Company has initiated a lawsuit against a Hong Kong-based jewelry firm, Red Earth Group, accusing it of selling unauthorized Mickey Mouse-themed jewelry. The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Los Angeles, targeting the company's online jewelry brand, Satéur.
Disney claims that the marketing and branding associated with Satéur's "Mickey 1928 Collection" infringe upon its trademark rights. The lawsuit suggests that Red Earth Group is deliberately attempting to mislead customers into believing that the jewelry items are officially licensed Disney merchandise. Disney alleges that the Hong Kong company intends to commercialize the recognizability of the Mickey Mouse trademark, leveraging consumer affection for both the character and the Disney brand itself.
The lawsuit highlights that Red Earth's online marketing strategically employs language that appeals to "Disney enthusiasts," which Disney argues is an effort to confuse consumers. This deception allegedly implies a partnership or collaboration between Red Earth Group and Disney, which the lawsuit contends is a breach of trademark law. Furthermore, Disney emphasizes that although the first version of Mickey Mouse entered the public domain last year due to the expiration of Disney's copyright, the company still holds significant trademark protections regarding the character.
Lawyers representing Disney assert that Red Earth’s practices extensively leverage Mickey Mouse trademarks and the Disney brand, while also marketing their products in a manner suggestive of an affiliation with Disney. They argue that the use of nomenclature such as "Mickey 1928 Collection" and advertising the pieces as tributes to the character's original appearance in 1928 is misleading to consumers.
The centerpiece of the collection in question is the "Satéur Mickey 1928 Classique Ring," which features a charm reminiscent of the Steamboat Willie animation along with a synthetic stone. Disney's lawsuit claims that this product, along with others in the collection, blurs the lines between unauthorized merchandise and authentic Disney products, which is a serious violation of trademark law.
It's essential to delineate that copyright and trademark law serve different purposes; copyright protects artistic works, while trademarks safeguard company brands. Even if a character is in the public domain, its use on merchandise in a way that suggests an affiliation with the brand owner is prohibited. Disney firmly asserts that Red Earth Group is engaging in such misleading practices.
In a statement, Disney expressed its commitment to defending against unlawful trademark infringement, stating that the company aims to protect consumers from the confusion caused by unauthorized uses of Mickey Mouse and other iconic characters. The lawsuit seeks a court injunction to prevent Red Earth Group from selling the jewelry or using Disney's trademarks, alongside monetary damages to be established later.
The ongoing litigation highlights Disney's vigilance in maintaining its intellectual property rights and its ongoing battle against unauthorized use of its beloved characters, even as the landscape of copyright law evolves.
