The prominent personal injury law firm Morgan & Morgan has decided to drop its lawsuit against Disney Enterprises, Inc., which sought a judicial ruling that the firm’s planned advertisement—featuring a parody version of the iconic Mickey Mouse character—did not infringe on Disney’s intellectual property rights.
The case, filed earlier this year in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, was voluntarily dismissed on Wednesday without prejudice, allowing Morgan & Morgan the option to refile in the future if necessary. The decision effectively ends, for now, one of the more unusual legal battles involving a law firm and one of the world’s most recognizable entertainment companies.
Background: The Mickey Mouse Dispute
Morgan & Morgan’s lawsuit centered on a proposed commercial parodying the original 1928 “Steamboat Willie” version of Mickey Mouse. That early version of the character, which debuted alongside Minnie Mouse in a black-and-white animated short, entered the public domain at the start of 2024 after nearly a century of copyright protection.
Following the expiration of the copyright, Disney retained control over several trademarks connected to Mickey Mouse, including the name, likeness, and design elements of the more modern iterations of the character. While the “Steamboat Willie” animation and its specific imagery are no longer protected by copyright, Disney has made clear that the company intends to aggressively defend its trademark rights and prevent misleading or unauthorized use that could confuse consumers or dilute the Disney brand.
Morgan & Morgan’s Planned Ad Campaign
In the lawsuit, Morgan & Morgan described plans for a humorous television and digital advertisement featuring an animated sequence inspired by the vintage “Steamboat Willie” style. The ad reportedly showed the Mickey-like character piloting a steamboat that crashes into a car driven by a Minnie-style character. Following the collision, the female driver contacts Morgan & Morgan’s law firm for legal representation.
The firm emphasized that the ad was intended as a parody and satire, asserting that it was a form of protected expression under U.S. copyright and trademark law. To avoid any potential confusion with Disney or its subsidiaries, Morgan & Morgan stated that it planned to include a clear disclaimer at the end of the commercial:
The Legal Proceedings
According to court documents, Morgan & Morgan reached out to Disney in July 2025, seeking written assurance that its parody ad would not be met with claims of copyright or trademark infringement. When the firm received no response, it filed a declaratory judgment lawsuit in September 2025, seeking a court order confirming its right to air the advertisement.
In its complaint, the firm argued that Disney’s continuing control over the character’s image could create a chilling effect on free expression and legitimate parody. The lawsuit asserted that Morgan & Morgan’s ad used a public-domain version of Mickey Mouse and that no reasonable consumer would believe the ad had been produced or endorsed by Disney.
Disney’s Response and Position
Disney did not initially file a counterclaim but maintained its long-standing position that it will “vigorously protect” its intellectual property. A Disney spokesperson reiterated that while certain versions of early Mickey Mouse material are now in the public domain, the company continues to hold enforceable trademark rights and will take action against any use that might mislead the public into believing Disney is associated with, or endorses, outside products or services.
Voluntary Dismissal and Potential Next Steps
On November 12, Morgan & Morgan filed a notice voluntarily dismissing the case without prejudice. This type of dismissal allows the firm to reopen or refile the case later if the dispute resurfaces. No settlement details were disclosed, and neither party commented publicly on whether the law firm’s advertisement would proceed as originally planned.
While the reason for the dismissal remains unclear, legal observers suggest the firm may have chosen to avoid a lengthy and costly litigation battle with Disney, which is known for its rigorous intellectual property enforcement.
Implications for Copyright and Trademark Law
The case highlights a growing legal gray area surrounding creative works entering the public domain. When “Steamboat Willie” entered the public domain in 2024, it marked the first time Mickey Mouse could legally be used by the public without Disney’s authorization—at least in his earliest form.
However, even with the lapse of copyright, trademark law continues to restrict certain uses of the character’s image, especially those that could suggest endorsement or affiliation. Legal experts note that companies using public-domain characters must tread carefully to ensure they do not infringe on related trademarks or trade dress.
Conclusion
For now, Morgan & Morgan appears to have stepped back from its legal confrontation with Disney—but the firm’s challenge underscores the tension between creative expression and corporate brand protection. As more beloved characters from the early 20th century enter the public domain, similar disputes are likely to arise, forcing courts to balance the rights of creators, corporations, and the public.
Whether Morgan & Morgan will revive its parody ad remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: the boundaries of intellectual property law continue to evolve in the age of digital media, parody advertising, and global entertainment giants like Disney.
Legal professionals navigating intellectual property or media law should stay informed about evolving case law and emerging disputes. Visit LawCrossing.com today to explore thousands of legal job openings in IP law, entertainment law, and litigation. Whether you’re an attorney seeking your next big opportunity or a law student planning your career path, LawCrossing is your gateway to the most comprehensive database of legal jobs nationwide.
