Micky Mouse’s Whiskers What if Epstein Designed Them ?

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1070, 6 September 1930, Page 18

Micky Mouse’s Whiskers What if Epstein Designed Them ?

Hickey mouse figured in the Chancery Court, London, recently, when the man who put whiskAltogether there were six Mickey Mouses in court, one on the judge’s defok, one on the witness box and some in front o£ counsel, and solicitors. The action had been brought by Dean’s Rag Book QIA Company, Ltd.. nil) who asked for an J I injunction re- /tl straining Messrs. Pomaraxitz au d /Ww Sons, of Commercial Road, K., from selling copies of ( the plaintiff’s resintered toy desl„.n Mr. At. Mouse Infringement, was denied and it was also pleaded that the registration of the design was invalid, as it was liot original, but was based on cinematograph films. Mr. Justice Luxmoore said there had already been a case about Felix the cat, and the mouse came after tlie cat.. Mr Trevor Watson, for the plaintiff, said they did not claim a monopoly of Mickey Mouses. If anyone worked up his conception of the traditional figure differently it might make all the difference. Inventor of the Whiskers Mr. Richard Evans Eliett, principal designer for Dean’s Rag Book Company, said there’ were no teeth and no whiskei’s in the picture of Mickey Mouse. They were very pronounced, however, in the toy he designed. “His whiskers are my invention,” he said, "and the defendants have got them.” I Mr. Moritz (for the defence): Per- ! haps Mr. Eliett will tell us how he ! reached his design.

Mr. Eliett said he produced it from his memory of the films.

You soaked yotirself in Mickey Mouse before yoxx made a di’awing?— I saturated myself in it. If Epstein Designed One Mr. MacGillivray, for the plaintiffs, said the defendants might go to Mr. Epstein and ask him to design a Mickey Mouse for them. Thei’e was a bui-st of laughter and Mr. MacGillivray exclaimed: “I am sure he could design one which everybody would recognise as Mickey j Mouse and also as Mr. Epstein.” Mr. Justice Luxmoore: Would he have larger hands or larger feet? Counsel: He is capable of combining tlie two characteristics, but there would be a Mickey Mouse which was not our design and was not an infringement. A “Mickey Mouse” doll was held up j by Mi. Trevor Watson, K.C., who asked Mr. Pomarantz if he thought j its feet were like ducks’ feet. Mr. Pomarantz: I don’t think so. Mr. Trevor Watson observed that he was not an authority on ducks’ feet, and asked Mr. Pomarantz if ho thought “Mickey Mouse’s” feet were like soup plates? Mr. Justice Luxmoore: If you are not an authority on ducks’ feet, Mr. Trevor Watson, are you an authority on soup plates? Mr. Moritz, K.C.: it. would be a great pity if tlie result of this case were the judicial finding that soup plates were like ducks’ feet. Mr. Justice Luxmoore picked up a “Mickey Mouse” doll which suddenly emitted a mournful squeak. “I am satisfied that the model of Pomarantz and Sons was made without any assistance from the design of Dean’s Rag Book Company, Ltd.”, he declared. He held that the registration of Dean’s design was a valid registration. He thought an examination revealed differences sufficient to satisfy him that there had been no copying of the registered design. The action was dismissed.