By Stone Martindale Feb 17, 2007, 5:14 GMT
This is the retelling of a complicated blustery tale involving the beloved Winnie the Pooh and Disney Studios that has taken an interesting turn. Bloomberg published an outline of an important federal court ruling today outlining Disney and rights to the Winnie the Pooh character.
Winnie the Pooh (2nd L) poses for a photo (L-R) Rabbit, Eeyore and Tigger during a ceremony celebrating Pooh's 80th anniversary with a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame in Los Angeles. Pooh, created in the 1920's by British author A.A. Milne, debuted as a cartoon character in the 1966 Disney featurette 'Winnie the Pooh and the Honey Tree,' EPA/ARMANDO ARORIZO
You may or may not know this, but the loveable bear of very little brain has been the center of a nasty long term legal battle. The case is Clare Milne et al v. Stephen Slesinger Inc., U.S. District Court, Central District of California, 02-8508.
Edvard Pettersson of Bloomberg reports that "Walt Disney Co., the world's second-largest media company, lost a court bid to void the rights to the Winnie the Pooh characters held by Stephen Slesinger Inc.
U.S. District Judge Florence-Marie Cooper ruled yesterday in Los Angeles federal court that Disney and the granddaughters of Pooh author A.A. Milne and illustrator Ernest Shepard can't challenge a licensing agreement struck with Slesinger in 1983.
The ruling, disclosed on the court's Web site today, eliminates a procedural hurdle to Slesinger seeking more than $2 billion in damages from Disney."
You can almost hear Eeyore's deep sighs and Piglet's anxietal cries for help. Disney allegedly had attempted an engineered end to Slesinger's rights to the lovable characters it has so cleverly marketed for four plus decades.
Bloomberg reports that Slesinger struck a deal and acquired the rights from Milne in 1930.
"This is definitely a setback for Disney," said Carole Handler, an intellectual property lawyer with Foley & Lardner in Los Angeles to Bloomberg. "They tried to dismantle the license of the party that has been most troublesome to them in court."
Todays ruling is just part of a 16-year long legal battle between Disney Studios and Slesinger, Bloomberg reports that it has been fought in state and federal courts and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office too.
Los Angeles-based Slesinger asked the Patent Office last week "to cancel rights to 25 Pooh-related names obtained by Disney since 1996."
Disney 'was not the owner of the registered marks at the time that these filings were made,' Slesinger said in a petition. The company was 'at most, only a licensee.'
Who is Slesinger? Bloomberg reports that the savvy businessman was a publisher, who in 1930 struck a deal with Pooh creator Milne, and became the U.S. and Canadian merchandising rights owner to the Pooh characters.
Cut to 1961, with Disney negotiating with his widow, and under an agreement, Slesinger's company was entitled to 4 percent of the Pooh sales in royalties. Bloomberg reports that under a separate accord, Milne's own estate received 2.5 percent.
Cut to 1983, now the three Pooh parties negotiated yet a new agreement that Bloomberg claims doubled the Milne heirs' share of the royalties and revoked the previous legal agreements.
Fast forward to 1991, Slesinger sues Disney in California state court, saying the company "underreported sales of Pooh-related merchandise."
Bloomberg reports that suit "was thrown out after the judge found Slesinger illegally obtained evidence from Disney's trash bins. Slesinger is appealing that decision."
'The ruling has no bearing whatsoever on Disney's rights to the Pooh characters,' Disney lawyer Dan Petrocelli said in a telephone interview to Bloomberg. 'Nor does it effect the judgment Disney won throwing out the state court case.'
Slesinger's legal counsel countered with this statement: "Now that Disney's misguided claims have been dismissed, we can focus on pursuing Slesinger's claims against Disney for damages, trademark and copyright infringement, breach of contract, and fraudulently underpaying royalties, and seeking in excess of $2 billion in compensatory and general damages," said Barry Slotnick, Slesinger's attorney, reported Bloomberg.
Oh, bother!
Your Talkback on this Story