3 ms·
> Disney would still profit from the MCU films which they produced in the 2010's, but they couldn't stop you from releasing your own Batman vs Spider-Man story.
by jfim 1y ago
> Disney would still profit from the MCU films which they produced in the 2010's, but they couldn't stop you from releasing your own Batman vs Spider-Man story.
Wouldn't they still have a trademark on those characters though?
- ncallaway 1y agoThe trademark on characters is related to selling goods, if the character is used as a way of identifying an authentic seller. So, if Disney is using mickey mouse on t-shirts to identify it as a Disney manufactured t-shirt, you wouldn't be allowed to use mickey mouse on t-shirts in a similar fashion in a way that might cause consumer confusion about who manufactured the t-shirt. If Wolverine was in the public domain, then they couldn't use a Wolverine trademark to stop you from selling a Wolverine comic book. However, if they used a _specific_ Wolverine mark to identify it as a Disney Wolverine book, then you'd be restricted from using that. Basically, trademark exists to prevent consumer confusion about who is the creator that is selling a good.
- jfim 1y agoI see, so in that hypothetical world, one could make a spider guy comic book that looks suspiciously like another, but not label it "The Amazing Spiderman (r)"? Sounds like it would be a boon for things like fan art and fan fiction.