Pixar's Lawsuit

[Lord_Stewie]

Hey,

Searched for this, couldn't find it. If this is discussed just let me know so I could get it merged.

Story begins with the upcoming Luxo Lamp added to the special edition of Up movie.

Here is the package:

yes that Lamp in that 150+bucks package involved in this.

The Issue is that the Creators of the Lamp is suing Pixar

Anyways here is the news:

The manufacturers of the Luxo lamp, model for Pixar’s mascot, have ended over two decades of happy cooperation by the two companies by this week filing a lawsuit against the animation studio. While they have been more than happy for Pixar to use the likeness of their product on screen, the lawsuit seems to have been brought about by both the new Luxo Jr. replica lamps that Disney will be packaging in the Premium Combo Pack release of the Up Blu-Ray, and a nifty looking animatronic 6ft-tall Luxo Jr. that has been making an appearance at Walt Disney World (and who you can see in action after the break).

According to a Bloomberg report on the suit (via The Pixar Blog), Pixar haven’t used the Luxo brand name before now, which doesn’t add up to me because the short is called Luxo Jr. and is named on at least one DVD and one Blu-Ray already in my collection. All the same, they haven’t been selling their own lamps, I know that much. I love you Pixar, but surely somebody in your merchandising department should have officially licensed this?

Is Pixar’s mistake here really that different to me making a cartoon about Coca-Cola then launching my own version of the drink as a tie-in? It seems to be a stunningly clear breach of somebody else’s design copyright to me.

For the last 20-some years, and particularly since Toy Story, I’m sure that the use of a Luxo lamp in all of Pixar’s branding and logotypes has been a great asset to the Norwegian lighting manufacturers. I can’t imagine how many extra lamps this sold to fans, and by extension, how many sales are going to be lost through Disney Pixar releasing their unlicensed knock-off.

Hopefully a last minute agreement can be struck by which Luxo are paid a licensing fee on each Premium Combo Pack sold? And going onwards, how about Luxo manufacturing official Pixar merch?

The LA Times have related a ‘no comment’ in behalf of Disney.

Here’s a look at the animatronic Luxo Jr. in action.

How is this Fiasco going to end?

Is the word Luxo the problem to begin with?

Also check out this VIDEO.

Enjoy.

[Diesel]

Wow...did Pixar really NOT expect the company would say/do something?

[Lord_Stewie]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Wow...did Pixar really NOT expect the company would say/do something?

I guess they didn't and now they have an issue to deal with.

[Jack Wade]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Wow...did Pixar really NOT expect the company would say/do something?

Considering they've had an amicable relationship since making the Luxo, Jr. short film, including the use of Luxo in Easter Eggs in a handful of Pixar's features, why would they?

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Jack Wade

Considering they've had an amicable relationship since making the Luxo, Jr. short film, including the use of Luxo in Easter Eggs in a handful of Pixar's features, why would they?

Because its always been in films not actual physical replications of their product.

[Jack Wade]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Because its always been in films not actual physical replications of their product.

So? They are still using the likeness of their products in feature films which would be a welcome target for any company to sue over due to the amount of revenue generated.

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Jack Wade

So? They are still using the likeness of their products in feature films which would be a welcome target for any company to sue over due to the amount of revenue generated.

They obviously had no problem with the digital representation of the product, like the article said, it probably boosted sales for the company.

I guess Pixar putting out an actual product that they have the rights to irked them a little too far.

Pixar, at the least, should have consulted the company before doing so.

[assydingo]

The chances of me buying a Luxo Lamp have decreased to almost zero.

[OrlandoEastwood]

Well, they should have gotten the Luxo makers to actually make the lamps the Blu-Ray release.

[Duffy12]

Di$ney is being sued by another for using its product!!!

Oh the irony!!!!!

Does anybody remember Di$ney going after that kids school threatening lawsuits for having their cartoon characters painted on one of there walls?

What goes around comes around.

[themanknownassting]

Wouldn't these be worth more in a few years if we order one then they pull them after the lawsuit?

[tilapiah6]

I love how they're selling a LAMP for 120 bucks and packaged with a, at most, 30 dollar Blu-ray. Pixar could've done better with the pricing. I think it's right for the company to sue them. Pixar could have made it a replica or maybe a statue of the lamp to avoid getting sued.

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by tilapiah6

I love how they're selling a LAMP for 120 bucks and packaged with a, at most, 30 dollar Blu-ray. Pixar could've done better with the pricing. I think it's right for the company to sue them. Pixar could have made it a replica or maybe a statue of the lamp to avoid getting sued.

And you know people will buy it (if this makes it to the shelves) sadly.

[tilapiah6]

I'll stick with the 3 disc collectors edition for my daughter. She doesn't need all the bells and whistles.

[Lord_Stewie]

Originally Posted by Diesel

And you know people will buy it (if this makes it to the shelves) sadly.

Agreed there will be those who will purchase that abomination.

[P@t_Mtl]

Where is the controversy? It's a law suit, aren't these things a normal thing is the USA? I would see a controversy if a movie was release in the USA without a law suit.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Wow...did Pixar really NOT expect the company would say/do something?

I figured it was licensed and I'm pretty sure Luxo has officially said that they don't mind their name being used for the short. The design of the lamp is actually a little different though, so I don't know think Luxo would have grounds to sue because of the design alone, it's probably due to the fact that they identify the replica as "Luxo". If it instead said "Pixar's Junior Lamp", with no mention of the Luxo brand, I bet Disney could win a lawsuit easily. In fact, I bet Luxo wouldn't have even tried suing in that case.

Originally Posted by tilapiah6

I love how they're selling a LAMP for 120 bucks and packaged with a, at most, 30 dollar Blu-ray. Pixar could've done better with the pricing. I think it's right for the company to sue them. Pixar could have made it a replica or maybe a statue of the lamp to avoid getting sued.

I'm pretty damn sure it's NOT a real lamp. It is a "replica". It looks like a lamp, and it probably even moves like that model of lamp would, but I'm sure it does not have a functioning light socket and all that.

I think the funny thing about this is that if Luxo had a licensed Luxo Jr. lamp available, I'd definitely buy it, but I'm not touching this fluff junk overpriced garbage. I even went as far as to check out the lamp model that inspired the short, and frankly, it looks way too different than the one from the short for me to want to buy it.