Is Disney Starting to Crack Down on the Replica/Prop World?
- Thread starter TRCViper
- Start date
Lichtbringer
Master Member
No matter what we think about the new movies or the mouse company itself - they paid and now it´s their property.
I would be sad if they bring down those little runs where a fan makes a handfull pieces to bring the price for his own one down. Or have a regular shop and pay regular taxes at least.
But on the other hand i would not have a single tear for those that make one run after the other without paying taxes/License if the mouse stomps them into the ground.
Small runs from fans for fans is acceptable imho, using this hobby as a cash cow ....... nope.
I would be sad if they bring down those little runs where a fan makes a handfull pieces to bring the price for his own one down. Or have a regular shop and pay regular taxes at least.
But on the other hand i would not have a single tear for those that make one run after the other without paying taxes/License if the mouse stomps them into the ground.
Small runs from fans for fans is acceptable imho, using this hobby as a cash cow ....... nope.
There was a seller on Etsy, selling plush ones for $500 each booked up till Christmas of 2020. Wow
I bet they are attempting to contact privately through email to keep the sales alive.
Maybe, if they are smart they will heed the C & D, because if not, Disney legal will eat them alive
cboath
Master Member
Disney trying to stop Baby Yoda knockoffs sold on Etsy: report
First there were not enough Baby Yoda dolls and now it seems there are too many — at least for Disney’s liking.www.foxnews.com
Interesting read. A crocheted Baby Yoda? Really?
I haven't heard much recently regarding this sort of thing, I know there was some heat a while back.
Thoughts? Are we safe?
It goes back to the old stand-by. Don't be overt/stupid about it.
I don't consider it cracking down if they CD me over me posting my personal made items on ebay, etsy, or anywhere else says 'my baby yoda, $50'. Those are public STORES. Place like this? No, i don't see it because they're private - small audience stuff. You do actual online stores, and the only take is your out to make money so i'd fully expect them or anyone else to shut them down.
This-- as long as there are collectors who want to see the Lucasfilm authorized stamp of approval on prop replicas, and will drop the money on MR style stuff, they don't care about the RPFer making a vastly superior version for less money with a short run.
NakedMoleRat
Master Member
If they really were concerned about not upsetting their fan base, episodes VII -IX would have been quite different.
TazMan2000
Master Member
Some probably do want to have the Lucasfilm/Disney stamp of approval on their item. If it's a limited run and they paid a pretty penny, then their item is surely going to be worth more if it is well taken care of. I have no problem with that.
I think the problem is, what a lot of members have already mentioned here...these sellers are being rather stupid, peddling their unlicensed wares right in the face of Disney. They're the ones that may bring the full legal wrath of Disney upon everyone...the hobbyist and small time seller.
TazMan2000
Just checked, still active and still booked up till Xmas of 2020. I’ll pop over every now and then to see if they post any updates.
This isn't really any different than what CBS did with Star Trek. For the longest time they didn't care what they fans did or people like Rich Coyle made. But they eventually saw the money being made and decided to get in on it and started spitting out C & D's left and right.
Mara Jade's Father
Master Member
If you all do a little more reading from other news sources, you will see that the real issue is not the merchandise but the use of copyright names. Disney/LFL has allowed the items to be continued to be sold as long as certain copyright wording is omitted.
For the most part a board like this sort of gets a pass because we are not a marketplace like Etsy but that is not always the case. Over at ASAP about 18 years ago, I got a C&D letter from LEGO due to a post on the board in the sales area from a member selling life-size Lego lightsaber hilts. The letter went on to say that they suggest that "LEGO" be swapped with "Brick". So they had no issue with the fact that the design was a direct replica of the toy but they just did not want their name used as it was not a licensed product.
I think people should consider themselves lucky they still allow the products and that Disney/LFL is not going after the other Star Wars listings on etsy that also use other copyright protected wording. I think the Yoda and Madalorian wording is the main focus because due to the high demand, you now have perspective buyers Googling "baby Yoda" and being directed to places like Etsy selling these products. These new potential buyers have the possibility to really not understanding that such products are not licensed and therefore issues like delivery, quality, and safety may be a concern. Such negative results would damage their brand and LFL/Disney have invested and/or worked very hard to protect their brand image. Now we can debate all we want about whether places like eFx and Anovos have a positive or negative effect on the brand but the point is that LFL/Disney got to make the choice on that where as they have no choice/control on non licensed products on places like Etsy so they are entitled to do what they feel is right.
For the most part a board like this sort of gets a pass because we are not a marketplace like Etsy but that is not always the case. Over at ASAP about 18 years ago, I got a C&D letter from LEGO due to a post on the board in the sales area from a member selling life-size Lego lightsaber hilts. The letter went on to say that they suggest that "LEGO" be swapped with "Brick". So they had no issue with the fact that the design was a direct replica of the toy but they just did not want their name used as it was not a licensed product.
I think people should consider themselves lucky they still allow the products and that Disney/LFL is not going after the other Star Wars listings on etsy that also use other copyright protected wording. I think the Yoda and Madalorian wording is the main focus because due to the high demand, you now have perspective buyers Googling "baby Yoda" and being directed to places like Etsy selling these products. These new potential buyers have the possibility to really not understanding that such products are not licensed and therefore issues like delivery, quality, and safety may be a concern. Such negative results would damage their brand and LFL/Disney have invested and/or worked very hard to protect their brand image. Now we can debate all we want about whether places like eFx and Anovos have a positive or negative effect on the brand but the point is that LFL/Disney got to make the choice on that where as they have no choice/control on non licensed products on places like Etsy so they are entitled to do what they feel is right.
Last edited:
big F
New Member
But sadly they don't and along with half of current Hollywood's writers they can only write a script if its a rehash of a previous successful script.
So we are stuck with crappy stories and the occasional great character wasted, and some time a great visual, that means more than the last 30 mins of scripting.
Dr Jones Sr
Sr Member
This is exactly what I was going to say, Disney was caught off-guard by the huge popularity of Mandalorian and Child (wouldn't that be a nice creche come Christmas) and is scrambling to catch up.
I work in Disneyland and initially we had no merchandise. Then a few weeks ago they rushed in a single t-shirt design, mint green with the Child on the front and huge lettering MANDALORIAN across the back. They've sold thousands of the things. I talked to our people at WDW and they said they had nada, so it must have been an enterprising somebody here in California that got those green shirts made.
As of last week we had four t-shirt designs on the racks in Tomorrowland, and a collection of themed socks. Our WDW people said they had the socks but hadn't seen any t-shirts yet.
It's unusual for Disney to be caught asleep at the switch when it comes to cross-marketing, but clearly they were. They've been burned several times by the opposite: packing the shelves with merchandise connected to a film that ends up being a flop.
BTW does anybody remember the story that was in the news around 15 years ago when US Customs impounded an entire shipment of t-shirts (tens of thousands of them) at LA Harbor that had Mickey Mouse and various other Disney characters doing nasty things with each other?
Last edited:
Agree completely. I am not even sure that Disney/LFL has the phrase "Baby Yoda" copyrighted. Perhaps they have, to cover their bases, even though they admit this character is not BY. Could they stop people from selling "Mandalorian Helmets?" Yes. Could they stop someone from selling a "galactic bounty hunter" helmet?? Perhaps. I think it all depends if they have design patents on all of the props and costume elements. A design patient protects the external appearance of an object. Have they 'design' patents on the props from The Mandalorian? Perhaps. It should be searchable online. COULD they get a design patent on the Razor crest knob? Hell no! It's not nearly unique enough to be awarded a design patent. Could they get a design patent on "The Child?" Hard to say really.. haven't there been so many imps, gnomes, elves, gremlins etc being sold in every format imaginable for decade upon decade. How many characters have their been with cherubic faces, puppy-dog eyes, and big ears over the years. Seriously doubt they could patent the design of the child, it's just not unique enough.
Lichtbringer
Master Member
It doest matter if they have done that.
With their money they are capable of fighting any lawsuit as long as needed to drain their opponent of all their money. No small company or illegal producer within their legal area (China might be harder
) can afford paying their lawyers as long as Disney can.
With their money they are capable of fighting any lawsuit as long as needed to drain their opponent of all their money. No small company or illegal producer within their legal area (China might be harder
) can afford paying their lawyers as long as Disney can.
ggriffaw
Sr Member
I have to think Disney has some kind of copyright on the character's appearance including The Child. It is distinct enough that most people recognize who it is instantly.
I was told by a copyright lawyer about a case where a major league baseball pitcher from the 50s or 60s sued because an illustration in an ad showed a pitcher in a similar stance as this pitcher was known for. Apparently the stance was somewhat distinctive. The pitcher's name was not in the ad. The pitcher wasn't a household name, so I doubt very many people even noticed the similarity. I believe the pitcher got compensated for the image.
Having a copyright on the name "The Child" might not be possible unless they also take context into account. The words "The Child" are too generic. Using "Baby Yoda" is most likely not allowed because "Yoda" is most likely copyrighted.
I was told by a copyright lawyer about a case where a major league baseball pitcher from the 50s or 60s sued because an illustration in an ad showed a pitcher in a similar stance as this pitcher was known for. Apparently the stance was somewhat distinctive. The pitcher's name was not in the ad. The pitcher wasn't a household name, so I doubt very many people even noticed the similarity. I believe the pitcher got compensated for the image.
Having a copyright on the name "The Child" might not be possible unless they also take context into account. The words "The Child" are too generic. Using "Baby Yoda" is most likely not allowed because "Yoda" is most likely copyrighted.
