SF Tattoo Artist: Pixar Tricked Me Into Providing Model for Movie Character
The copyright suit says the company rented San Francisco tattooist Sweet Cicely Daniher's unicorn-adorned van for a corporate party, then gave it a starring role in the upcoming film "Onward" without her permission.
January 29, 2020 at 02:19 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
San Francisco tattooist Sweet Cicely Daniher likes unicorns. She's authored a book about unicorn imagery. She's painted a unicorn mural on her '72 Chevy van that's been featured in San Francisco Magazine. "At the risk of belaboring the point," her attorneys wrote in a complaint filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, "the Plaintiff has had a real thing for unicorns, for a very long time, and they have been a central theme and subject matter of her artistic work, throughout the entirety of her career."
Now, Daniher alleges, Pixar Animation Studios and Walt Disney Motion Pictures Group have tricked her into letting them use her "Vanicorn" in the upcoming film "Onward." Her suit accuses the companies of copyright infringement and violations of state and federal laws protecting artwork.
Daniher v. Rae alleges that in September 2018, Pixar Production Office Manager Jane Clausen contacted Daniher and told her that the company "just stumbled upon a badass photo of you and your amazing van in San Francisco Mag and shrieked with joy." Would Daniher be willing to rent the Vanicorn to Pixar for a "one day music festival/activity day for Pixar employees and families" later that month? "Your van would just be a show piece and not used in any way other than a visual prop," Clausen wrote.
Daniher agreed and signed a contract stating that all rights of every kind "arising out of the use of the Vehicle in connection with the Production shall be solely owned in perpetuity, throughout the universe, by any means, devices, or methods, now known and unknown and in any media, now known and unknown," by Pixar and anyone to whom it assigned the rights.
Daniher's lawyers, Jared Weinstock of Los Angeles and J. Conor Corcoran of Philadelphia, contend that phrase "in connection with the Production" limits those rights to the Pixar employee event held Sept. 14, 2018.
Eight months later Daniher learned that Pixar was producing a 3D computer-animated motion picture titled "Onward." The movie features a character named Guinevere, a dark blue 1972 Chevrolet G10 van with "a big mural of a unicorn on its side" that is "clearly a direct copy and/or visual duplication and/or doppelganger of the Plaintiff's Vanicorn, down to the very same year, make and model," the complaint alleges.
According to a Pixar fan blog attached to the complaint, Pixar Creative Director Jay Ward took the lead on getting the van built. "This meant finding the right donor vehicle, overseeing the shop crew who was doing the work and granting creative approvals along the way," according to blogger Dan the Pixar Fan.
Daniher says she gave no such approval. She alleges that, after registering her disapproval on Instagram, "Onward" producer Kori Rae called her and apologized, allegedly explaining that Pixar had to rely on the employee event subterfuge "because at that time, the movie had no title, and the Defendants believed they couldn't have the Plaintiff sign a non-disclosure agreement without a title."
Daniher is now seeking to enjoin Pixar and Disney from distributing "Onward" and any Guinevere merchandise that infringes Daniher's copyright.
"To be absolutely clear, the Plaintiff is not claiming that she possesses a general copyright prohibiting, or in any way forbidding, the rightful ability of any person (or any company, for that matter) to paint a unicorn on the [side] of their van," Weinstock and Corcoran write. But, they say, "Defendants have unquestionably used the Plaintiff's copyrighted Vanicorn to be the Guinevere character in 'Onward.'"
Intellectual property litigator Lawrence Townsend of Owen, Wickersham & Erickson, who's not involved in the case, said that if the allegations are true, Daniher would have a strong case that Pixar had access to her work. That would mean she'd only have to prove substantial similarity, rather than precise copying, for a finding of infringement.
But Townsend said he doubts the Vanicorn would meet even that relaxed standard. The animal on the Pixar van has wings and no horn, making it a Pegasus, not a unicorn, he says, and they're depicted in different postures. While the similarity between the two vans could be evidence of Pixar's access to Daniher's work, the van itself is "a useful article" that would be irrelevant to the similarity analysis.
"You can't point to, 'We both used the same medium,'" Townsend says.
He also said it would not be copyright infringement if Pixar had simply wanted to study her van up close to see how certain technical features were accomplished in scaling and fitting them properly.
Daniher also accuses Pixar and Disney of violating the federal Visual Artists Right Act and the California Artists Protection Act. The companies have taken distorted, modified or mutilated "a highly personal and public transubstantiation of [Daniher's] personality," the complaint alleges, by using it "a commercial and corporate conduit for the aspirations of a pair of blue boy elves looking for their father in a mass marketed Disney film."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute readMarriott to Pay $52M, Upgrade Cybersecurity to Settle Probes Into 3 Big Breaches
'Monopoly Power'?: NCAA Faces Another Antitrust Class Action Alleging NIL Exploitation
2 minute readMusic Streaming App Platform Musi Sues Apple on Breach-of-Contract Claims
Trending Stories
- 1The Law Firm Disrupted: Playing the Talent Game to Win
- 2GlaxoSmithKline Settles Most Zantac Lawsuits for $2.2B
- 3BD Settles Thousands of Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
- 4Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 5Inside Track: Late-Career In-House Leaders Offer Words to Live by
Who Got The Work
Nicholas M. DePalma and Christian R. Schreiber of Venable have stepped in to represent CP Management Services, CRS RB4 Holdings and other defendants in a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The suit was filed Aug. 30 in Virginia Eastern District Court by Greenberg Traurig on behalf of Daito Kentaku USA. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Claude M. Hilton, is 1:24-cv-01538, Daito Kentaku USA, LLC v. Comstock Partners, LC.
Who Got The Work
Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs partner Andrew J. Pulliam has entered an appearance for Steve Jensen in a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The action, filed Aug. 30 in Tennessee Middle District Court by the Law Office of Perry A. Craft on behalf of Timothy Robins, accuses the defendant of writing a worthless check for over $94,000 for the sale of auctioned goods. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Eli J. Richardson, is 3:24-cv-01064, Robins v. Jensen et al.
Who Got The Work
Lane Powell shareholder Pilar C. French has entered an appearance for Penney OpCo LLC in a pending consumer class action. The complaint, filed Aug. 26 in Oregon District Court by Hattis & Lukacs, alleges that the company markets fictional discounts for certain products. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai, is 6:24-cv-01414, Gamble v. Penney OpCo LLC.
Who Got The Work
Donald L. Carmelite and Coryn D. Hubbert of Marshall Dennehey have stepped in to defend the City of York, Detective Roland Comacho and Detective Lisa Daniels in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Middle District Court by Levin & Zeiger on behalf of Noel Matos Montalvo, seeks damages for the amount of time that Montalvo was incarcerated over five years for the exonerated killing of his common law wife. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jennifer P. Wilson, is 1:24-cv-01459, Montalvo v. City of York, et al.
Who Got The Work
Joseph M. Englert, Brian E. Pumphrey and M. Laughlin Allen of McGuireWoods have entered appearances for Bank of America NA in a pending class action. The action was filed Aug. 26 in Georgia Northern District Court by Podhurst Orseck; Webb, Klase & Lemond; Crabtree & Auslander; and Morrison + Associates on behalf of the representative of the beneficiaries of the Arthur N. Weinraub Trust, a trust which contains residential real property. The suit accuses the defendant of overcharging the trust by selecting unnecessary and/or excessively priced insurance for the property. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Thomas W. Thrash Jr., is 1:24-cv-03780, Weinraub v. Bank of America, N.A.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250