Add Your Voice ↓
First of all, the unicorn on the plaintiff’s van is a unicorn. The one on the van in the movie is a pegasus (not even an alicorn; it has no horn at all). Plaintiff’s image is rearing/rampant. Pegasus on van in movie is in a leaping/merry-go-round position. The vans are different colors. The windows are different shapes.
If ‘painting anything fantasy on a van’ is somehow copyright infringement… there’s a hell of a lot of people out there that are doing it and she better get writing those Cease and Desist letters….
Yeah, this is kind of where I am, too. Fantasy scenes, including Unicorns. on vans is a common enough art theme. It isn’t this person’s intellectual property.
However, the fact that they rented this van, and apologized about the situation is an indicator that they knowingly set out to copy the artwork, which could get them into trouble
Exactly! Disney and Pixar’s van is definitely a Pegasus!
These mystical creatures have been on Van’s since the 1970’s!
People should sue her!
Seriously, first the Inside Out lawsuits and now this?! I hope the movie doesn’t end up getting pulled at the last minute, because all she’s really doing is desperately seeking attention just to get loads amount of money…like with all those other unnecessary lawsuits that are constantly being filed for stupid reasons every day!
It amazes how Disney fanatics blindly support the company even when they’re clearly in the wrong. They sue people all the time for copyright infringement for work on Etsy and EBay. Yet, here they are with prior work history with this lady and a contract that outlines the uses of the van and you guys are still defending Disney. Unbelievable
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Sign me up for the newsletter!
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.