OZ perhaps not as public domain as we hope

[robcat2075]

Disney, Warner Bros. Fighting Over 'Wizard of Oz' Trademarks

 

 

They even want to own the term "Flying Monkeys"

[Rodney]

There is big money to be made in merchandising and that means a lot can also be spent on lawyers to stake the corporate claim and protect it.

Warners seems to have a pretty good case when it comes to the trademark itself but it'd be a much better case if it was the Baum estate itself was making the claim. The main case for Warners seems to be that they have the legally granted right to use the trademarks from the Baum estate the Baum estate is probably more than willing to side with Warners (and/or Disney) because of their interest in the properties. It's a lot easier to chase after money from one or two companies rather than everyone.

 

I recently read another article about how Walt Disney himself had long hoped to put the characters of Oz into production because of how highly he thought of the characters. The article, by Jim Hill, is quite revealing:

 

Disney's long long journey to Oz

 

In a lot of ways this looks like a non-starter outside of the specifics related to the classic film most of us consider as 'the original'. Most people that adapt Baum have known to stay clear of the classic film's iconography. 'Borrowing' from those could have them running afoul of the imagery (trademarks) associated with the film. This would be especially true where those 'marks' aren't in the original Baum material but can be shown to have originated in the 1939 film.

 

I would think Warners would have a tough time gaining any additional ground now after Disney (and many others) have released Oz films, TV series and a near endless stream of merchandising. Where they can stake and protect their claim would appear to be in the realm of products directly related to their movie.

 

Added: The lawyer's commentary is of interest because I think his statement about people using 'Harry Potter' illegally is an attempt to be a bit too clever. The trademark in Harry Potter is nowhere near 100 years old by any stretch of the imagination and thusly is on it's face a faulty comparison. My take on the inclusion of 'Harry Potter' is that it is a calculated reference that reveals this legal issue is not so much about the Oz trademark as it is an attempt to establish a modern day precedence for all copyrighted and trademarked characters. Specifically that once a legal precedence is set other cases are easier to win.