Mickey Mouse has changed a lot since he entered the public domain. That is, since it is not subject to copyright because, between 75 and 100 years after creation, an intellectual work becomes free of rights. Therefore, Mickey (or a Mickey in particular, we will get to that shortly) can be used outside the strict control of Disney, the multinational that gave him life. Now it is possible to see him smoking, killing and committing terrorist attacks. The iconic mouse, the ultimate symbol of the American entertainment empire and one of those great designs that are recognized simply by a silhouette, is being reinterpreted by various artists who are dedicated to creating their own extreme versions. On the one hand, they reinterpret a myth. On the other hand, it is a kind of long-awaited revenge against the giant Disney against the iron fist with which the corporation has protected his creations for decades.
Since January 1, 2024, the collective enthusiasm of artists has translated into an avalanche of mouse-centric content. Of course, only its original version, that is, that black and white Mickey Mouse that was seen for the first time in the movie Steamboat Willie (Willie and the steamboat 1928. If Mickey was an icon of childhood, entertainment, animated cinema, the American cultural empire is now also a symbol of motion anti-copyright.
Alex Cohen, comic illustrator very popular on Instagram under the alias Tinisekcomics, was one of the first to subvert Mickey's traditionally friendly image. Ironically, the author expressed his relief at “finally being able to share this historic document” without fear of legal consequences. In the illustration of him, Mickey confesses to having assassinated former President John F. Kennedy and claims that he would do it again.
Some were already planning their projects long before the character was in the public domain. In 2021, the MSCHF collective announced the creation of the first “famous mouse” artwork and sold tokens that could only be redeemed for collectibles this year. The videogame Inverse Ninjas VS. The Public Domain incorporated it almost immediately as soon as possible, on January 1, 2024. All the characters in this game belong to the public domain, such as Alice (from Alice in Wonderland), Sherlock Holmes or Winnie the Pooh (who also has seen how, once free of copyright, it became a bloody murderer). Other examples include Infestation: Origins, where the mouse is possessed, and the webcomic mousetrappedwhere he plans robberies. Several artists have depicted him smoking, inciting workers' struggle or in bed with Shrek.
The limits of humor
This liberation, be careful, does not allow absolutely everything. Since only the original black and white version is free of rights, it is not allowed to use its most popular image, the one wearing white gloves, yellow shoes and red pants. And since it is a trademark, it is prohibited to associate any new Mickey creation with the Disney brand. In addition, the release applies only to the US, for now. According to Javier R. Gigirey, partner at Gigirey Abogados and who was Disney's legal representative in Spain, the famous mouse has not entered the public domain in Europe. “In the EU, the date of death of the authors must be taken into account to be able to count from which date the copyright of the audiovisual work expires.” In this way, Mickey will be free of rights in Europe 70 years after the death of its last author, that is, in 2036.
Duke University law professor Jennifer Jenkins explained that “Disney promoted the law that extended the copyright term to 95 years.” [del plazo anterior de 75 años]what came to be called Mickey Mouse Protection Act” and underlines that the text “has been criticized for having a devastating effect on our ability to digitize, archive and access our cultural heritage.”
Disney is known for its rigorous, sometimes aggressive, protection of its brands. In 1989 the company threatened to sue to three small daycare centers in Hallandale, Florida, for painting their characters on their walls, arguing that this could be associated with their company. The trial did not come to fruition thanks to the intervention of Universal Studios, which allowed the representation of its characters as part of a publicity campaign. In 2008, Disney sued a couple receiving government assistance for wearing costumes similar to those of Tigger and Eeyore from the Winnie the Pooh series. The American giant is currently taking a Chilean car wash service called Star Wash to court for misuse of its brand. Star Wars.
Are you worried at Disney? Guardian mentioned in a report about it to Robert Thompson, professor of film, radio and television at Syracuse University. “Anyone who turns one hundred years old will have problems, but we see how Disney is entering its second century of life with a mountain of problems. I doubt that the expiration of the rights to the first Mickey is the most serious of all of them, because it is not the one on our t-shirts and cushions, but symbolically, copyright is very important to Disney to the point that laws have been changed to protect to the enterprise. It is the only company I know that is responsible for sending its lawyers if a small school in the middle of nowhere puts on an end-of-year function. The Lion King”. (Occurred in 2018).
According to Jenkins, the situation is even more unfair if we take into account the “success” that Disney has had in “exploiting the public domain” throughout its history. The director mentions that The queen of the snowby Hans Christian Andersen (whose original works are currently in the public domain), served as inspiration for frozen, while Hamlet influenced The Lion King. Additionally, the company has also produced countless versions of classic tales such as Alice in Wonderland, Snow White, and The Hunchback of Notre Dame. It would seem that the public domain is only liked by the company when it plays in its interests.
Even so, the director maintains that Mickey will stand the test of time, with or without rights: “His universe is much broader than what is fashionable on social networks at any given moment,” she believes. For Jenkins, the extreme versions of the character (smoker, homosexual or terrorist) capture attention due to the clash they pose with the candor and innocence with which we associate him, but time will determine the cultural relevance of these experiments. “If we think about the other characters in the public domain, like Pinocchio [del que ya en 1996 se estrenó una película donde era un asesino sangriento] or Robin Hood [del que hay hasta producciones pornográficas]. What versions come to mind? All Disney movies,” she exemplifies. The expert exposes the opposite effect that these parodies can have: “There are studies that show that the uses unpleasant of an iconic character reinforce the prestige of the original. Time will tell, but there are reasons to think that Disney's Mickey will remain intact in the public imagination,” he says.
One of the first notable cases of Disney lawsuits against artists involved the collective Air Pirateswhich published comics of the same name in which Mickey was portrayed transporting drugs and engaging in sexual encounters. The company withdrew the lawsuit after the authors agreed to cease publication. Disney managed to safeguard his founding symbol for almost a century, and everything indicates that his enormous power will manage to keep his image intact and armored in the collective imagination. However, right now, somewhere, as you read these lines, someone is painting Mickey Mouse doing horrible things. And it's legal.
You can follow ICON on Facebook, x, instagramor subscribe here to the Newsletter.
#Mickey #Mouse #smokes #drinks #kills #Disney #longer #controls #famous #mouse