Betty boop cartoon movie#
Betty boop cartoon full#

The footage of the women who did the Boop voice was framed as though it was some sort of audition footage. Myron Waldman was interviewed, but the producers never identified Myron was having been the head animator on more Betty Boops than anyone else. The animators who took over and re-designed the character were never mentioned. Grim Natwick who created the first version of Betty was not credited at all. The impression was given that Max and Dave were the only creative forces at the studio.

Betty boop cartoon full#

While I'm going to have a full review of the show, I just want to note a few things here. The issue of whether Paramount legitimately sold the active Betty trademark to Harvey appears to be entirely separate, though very interesting.There is much more to the story of how Betty Boop was created then as presented by the producers of that program. It can use the trademark against those who would create new Bugs Bunny items, but not against those who would exploit old PD material that Warner failed to protect. If the Betty decision is not reversed on appeal, then Warner is stripped of its strongest weapon against the public domain. In recent years, Warner has used the active trademarks on Looney Tunes characters to quash third parties’ reissues of PD 1930s/40s Looney Tunes content (of which there is a lot). Fleischer tried to say trademark trumped copyright the judge is saying that it doesn’t. It can’t be used to stop people from redistributing old PD Betty images/items. What I take from the judge’s ruling is that the trademark only applies to new, modern uses of the character.

Betty boop cartoon movie#

The Betty Boop character is a Fleischer trademark.īut–Betty Boop 1930s movie posters were not copyrighted (or not renewed?) as standalone items, so are public domain.įleischer tried to use its active trademark on the character to stop a third party’s use of the ancient PD art.

UPDATE: Interesting analysis in the comments by animation historian David Gerstein: We hope that someday the studio deems it fit to restore and release these classics on DVD. Many of those films have legally entered the public domain, many others have not (they are still protected under copyrights held by Paramount/Viacom). Boop? No longer represented by the heirs of Max Fleischer and King Features Syndicate? Does this make Harvey Comics – or by extension, its current owner Classic Media – the owner of the property? Or is the character now in public domain.įor the record: The master film elements to original Fleischer Betty Boop cartoons are still owned by Paramount Pictures (and are maintained at the UCLA Film and Television Archive). Judge Susan Graber said there was no break in the chain of title.

On May 15th 1980, Harvey Cartoons transferred “Betty Boop and her Gang” to Alfred Harvey and his brothers. Harvey actively licensed the character in the early 1960s. Paramount assigned those rights to Harvey Films, Inc on June 27th, 1958.

Court of Appeals (based in San Francisco) ruled against the Fleischers, saying in their decision, “If we ruled that AVELA’s depictions of Betty Boop infringed Fleischer’s trademarks, the Betty Boop character would essentially never enter the public domain.”Īccording to court documents, the Fleischer Studio originally assigned its rights to Betty Boop to Paramount Pictures on July 11, 1941. over its licensing of public domain Betty Boop poster images (for handbags and T-shirts). The Fleischer Studio tried to sue Avela Inc. Fleischer Studios has been co-licensing (with King Features) the property (along with Pudgy, Grampy, Binmbo and Ko-Ko the Clown) for several decades now. Apparently the Fleischer estate has lost a court battle for the rights to Betty Boop, a character created by Grim Natwick at Max Fleischer’s studio in 1930.