Credit: Kadyn Pierce, UnsplashThe mouse has been busy lately — just not always where Disney wants him to be.
When the copyright for Steamboat Willie, the 1928 short that introduced the world to Mickey Mouse, expired at the start of 2024, public reaction was swift and chaotic. Within days, black-and-white Mickey began surfacing in everything from bootleg toys to meme culture. Then came the horror.
Filmmakers quickly seized on the mouse’s new legal status. A string of indie horror projects were announced, including Mickey’s Mouse Trap and The Return of Steamboat Willie, reimagining the beloved cartoon icon as a blood-soaked villain. The low-budget thrillers didn’t use the modern, red-shorts-wearing Mickey — only the early version now in the public domain — but that distinction didn’t stop them from drawing attention, both online and inside Disney’s legal department.
Because while Steamboat Willie may be free to use, Mickey Mouse is not.
Jewelry Brand Accused of Trademark Infringement
Disney has made several moves to make the most of the Mickey Mouse brand in recent years. That includes his first theme park ride, Mickey & Minnie’s Runaway Railway, at both Disneyland and Disney’s Hollywood Studios, and rumors of his first-ever feature-length film.
In the meantime, the company’s making an effort to produce the character’s integrity.
Its latest move to defend its most valuable character came this week, with a lawsuit filed in Los Angeles against the Red Earth Group — a Hong Kong jeweler accused of selling unlicensed Mickey Mouse jewelry under its online brand Satéur. According to the court filing, the company distributed items across Hong Kong and mainland China that feature Mickey’s image without permission.
The suit claims Satéur “intends to present Mickey Mouse as its own brand identifier for its jewelry merchandise” and “seeks to trade on the recognizability of the Mickey Mouse trademarks and consumers’ affinity for Disney and its iconic ambassador Mickey Mouse.”
It also points to the company’s promotional tactics. According to Disney, Satéur’s online listings describe the jewelry as a perfect gift for “Disney enthusiasts,” implying a collaboration that doesn’t exist. This, Disney says, is an attempt to “confuse consumers” and capitalize on the character’s legacy without securing the rights to do so.
A Long History of Legal Enforcement
Mickey Mouse may be Disney’s oldest character, but he’s also one of its most fiercely protected. And this isn’t the first time the company has taken legal action in defense of its signature creations.
Earlier this summer, Disney and NBCUniversal jointly sued Midjourney, the AI image generator, for enabling users to produce unauthorized depictions of characters, including Buzz Lightyear, Elsa, and Darth Vader. The lawsuit described the program as a “quintessential copyright free-rider and a bottomless pit of plagiarism,” designed to sidestep copyright protections by outsourcing infringement to users.
Disney and Universal say they tried to resolve the matter with Midjourney before pursuing legal action. However, reports indicate the company failed to engage meaningfully. “Midjourney continued to release new versions of its Image Service, which, according to Midjourney’s founder and CEO, have even higher quality infringing images,” the complaint states.
Disney has also taken aim at companies attempting to piggyback off its theatrical hits. In late 2013, it sued Canadian distributor Phase 4 Films over Frozen Land, arguing the title and logo were intentionally designed to resemble Frozen. Less than a month after filing, the two parties settled the case with a judgment that required the movie to restore its original name, The Legend of Sarila.
The agreement between the two companies also resolved Disney’s claims that the defendant intentionally redesigned its artwork, packaging, logo, and other promotional materials to resemble Frozen. As part of the settlement, Phase 4 agreed not to market its film using any trademarks, logos, or designs that could cause consumer confusion. The company is also required to take steps to remove Frozen Land from both physical retailers and online platforms.
And in one of its earliest headline-making trademark battles, Disney sued the Air Pirates collective in the 1970s for publishing underground comics that portrayed Mickey in graphic, adult scenarios. That fight dragged on for years — but sent a clear message that the studio was willing to litigate, even over parody.
As for the current case, proceedings are ongoing. Red Earth Group has not responded publicly, and Disney has offered no comment beyond its court filings. But the company’s position remains clear: whether on a silver ring or in a slasher flick, Mickey Mouse doesn’t belong to the world just yet.
