Awani Review

Complete News World

US Supreme Court renews toy inventor’s case over Disney bear ‘Toy Story 3’

US Supreme Court renews toy inventor’s case over Disney bear ‘Toy Story 3’

The justices overturned a lower court’s ruling that Disney was protected by the free speech provisions of the First Amendment to the Randis-Lisa Altzullin Dees-Lisa Industries case.

The Supreme Court weighed in on the intersection of trademark law and free speech on June 8 in favor of Jack Daniel’s in a dispute over a dog chew toy designed to look like whiskey bottles.

The high court asked the 9th United States Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider the Tice-Lisa case in light of this decision.

Company representatives did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the decision.

In 1994, Ms. Altzull invented a stuffed animal whose sleeves simulated winking, and her company Diece-Lisa Industries owned the intellectual property rights to the Lot of Hugs bear. Dice-Lisa sued Disney in 2012, claiming that Lots-O-Hug’s Bear and Disney toys based on the character were similar to Lots of Hugs and infringed on her trademark on the “Lots of Hugs” name.

The lots-o’-hugging’ bear nicknamed Lotso in ‘Toy Story 3’, which won the Best Animated Feature Oscar, grossed more than $1 billion at the global box office.

Los Angeles-based U.S. District Judge Terry Hatter ruled in favor of Disney in 2021, citing First Amendment protections. In 2022, the San Francisco-based 9th United States Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Terry Hatter’s decision.

In October, Mr. Altschul’s firm argued in the Supreme Court that Disney should not be protected under the “Rogers test,” a legal concept that allows artists to legally use trademarks without permission when they have an artistic connection to their work. will clearly mislead the consumer.

See also  New ft, Australia replaces its European helicopters

The 9th Circuit’s ruling “severely expanded” the test for protecting trademarks and titles of “culturally significant” works of art beyond its original scope, Dice-Lisa said.

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court reversed the Rogers test, ruling that the First Amendment did not protect a “Bad Spaniels” vinyl chew toy that parodies Jack Daniel’s trademark.

The case is Tice-Lisa Industries Inc. v. Disney Store USA LLC, US Supreme Court, no. 22-347.

To Dice-Lisa: William Delgado of DTO Law

For Disney: Robert Klieger of Houston Hennigan