Public Domain Day is coming — here’s what you need to know about characters like Betty Boop; The Beat, December 31, 2025

  Russ Burlingame, The Beat; Public Domain Day is coming — here’s what you need to know about characters like Betty Boop

As big-name characters enter the public domain, they come with asterisks.

"In just two days, when the calendar tips over into 2026, a number of beloved characters and works of art will lose copyright protection in the United States and enter the public domain. While this means you can print and sell your own versions of The Maltese Falcon and Animal Crackers, what’s arguably more important is the way the public domain fosters future creativity. When a character falls into the public domain, anyone can use them in derivative works, allowing for things like Wicked, featuring L. Frank Baum‘s characters from the world of Oz, or Jim, Percival Everett‘s award-winning novel based on the characters from The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, to exist.

Of course, artists wishing to dip into the public domain for inspiration also have to be careful: while “Rover” is public domain, it’s likely Disney will continue to guard any version of Mickey Mouse’s beloved dog that is named Pluto for another year. Early editions of books featuring characters like Nancy Drew and the Hardy Boys were sometimes rewritten or updated to reflect changing times, meaning that the version of The Secret of the Old Clock at your local library might still have copyright-protected elements.

In particular, the folks behind Fleischer Studios have signaled a willingness to fight over Betty Boop, who is headlining many of this year’s biggest “Public Domain Day” stories."

Blondie and Dagwood are entering the public domain, but Betty Boop still may be trapped in copyright jail; The Los Angeles Times, December 30, 2025

Michael Hiltzik, The Los Angeles Times; Blondie and Dagwood are entering the public domain, but Betty Boop still may be trapped in copyright jail

"Duke’s Jenkins refers to “the harm of the long term — so many works could have been rediscovered earlier.” Moreover, she says, “so many works don’t make it out of obscurity.” The long consignment to the wilderness thwarts “preservation, access, education, creative reuse, scholarship, etc., when most of the works are out of circulation and not benefiting any rights holders.”

Among other drawbacks, she notes, “films have disintegrated because preservationists can’t digitize them.” Many films from the 1930s are theoretically available to the public domain now, but not really because they’ve been lost forever.

What would be the right length of time? “We could have that same experience after a much shorter term,” Jenkins told me. “Looking back at works from the ‘70s and ‘80s has similar excitement for me.” Economic models, she adds, have placed the optimal term at about 35 years.

It’s proper to note that just because something is scheduled to enter the public domain, that doesn’t mean legal wrangling over its copyright protection is settled. 

With recurring characters, for instance, only the version appearing in a given threshold year enters the public domain 95 years later; subsequent alternations or enhancements retain protection until their term is up. That has led to courthouse disputes over just what changes are significant enough to retain copyright for those changes. 

“Copyrightable aspects of a character’s evolution that appear in later, still-protected works may remain off-limits until those later works themselves expire,” Los Angeles copyright lawyer Aaron Moss said."

Grand Forks man files trademark for “Fighting Sioux” nickname; Valley News Live, December 23, 2025

Devin Fry, Valley News Live ; Grand Forks man files trademark for “Fighting Sioux” nickname

"A Grand Forks man has applied to trademark the former nickname for the University of North Dakota. 

According to public documents from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Tyler Wilson filed the application for the “Fighting Sioux” nickname back in May...

The university says it strongly disputes the trademark claim and is working to resolve the issue with Wilson...

The “Fighting Sioux” nickname, which UND had used as its identity since 1930, was retired in 2012 following years of pressure from the NCAA. They have been the Fighting Hawks since 2015."

Lawmaker Sues to Remove Trump’s Name From the Kennedy Center; The New York Times, December 22, 2025

 Shawn McCreesh , The New York Times; Lawmaker Sues to Remove Trump’s Name From the Kennedy Center

"Representative Joyce Beatty, Democrat of Ohio, sued President Trump on Monday, seeking to force the removal of his name from the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

Ms. Beatty’s lawsuit names as defendants Mr. Trump and the loyalists he appointed to the center’s board. The suit contends that the board’s vote to change the name last week was illegal because an act of Congress is required to rename the building.

Ms. Beatty is represented by Norman Eisen, a White House ethics counsel in the Obama administration, along with Nathaniel Zelinsky, his co-counsel of the Washington Litigation Group.

Mr. Eisen said the name change “violates the Constitution and the rule of law because Congress said this is the name. He doesn’t have a right to change the name.”"

New Lawsuit Challenges Illegal Renaming of the Kennedy Center; Washington Litigation Group, December 22, 2025

 Washington Litigation Group; New Lawsuit Challenges Illegal Renaming of the Kennedy Center

"Congresswoman Joyce Beatty today sued President Trump and others to stop the unlawful renaming of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. The lawsuit was brought on behalf of the Congresswoman in her capacity as an ex officio trustee of the Kennedy Center by the Washington Litigation Group and Democracy Defenders Action. Congresswoman Beatty participated in the recent Board meeting and alleges she was prevented from speaking when she attempted to object to the renaming. 

“Only Congress has the authority to rename the Kennedy Center. President Trump and his cronies must not be allowed to trample federal law and bypass Congress to feed his ego,” said Congresswoman Beatty. “This entire process has been a complete disgrace to this cherished institution and the people it serves. These unlawful actions must be blocked before any further damage is done.”

Shortly after President Kennedy’s assassination, Congress designated the Kennedy Center as the sole national memorial within the nation’s capital to the late President. The lawsuit argues that because Congress named the center by statute, changing the Kennedy Center’s name requires an act of Congress. 

The suit follows a December 18, 2025 announcement that the Board had voted to rebrand the Kennedy Center with President Trump’s name, and the rapid installation of new exterior signage and related digital branding changes the next day. The lawsuit contends that the Board’s action is legally void and damages the institution’s public mission by turning a national memorial into a political vanity project.

“The President and his sycophants have no lawful authority to rename the Kennedy Center,” said Nathaniel Zelinsky, Senior Counsel at Washington Litigation Group and Amb. Norman Eisen (ret.), founder of Democracy Defenders Action. “Congress named the Kennedy Center as a national memorial to President Kennedy, and only Congress can change that. We are proud to represent Congresswoman Beatty as she defends the integrity of this institution and the separation of powers.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, asks the court to declare the Board’s renaming vote unlawful and without legal effect, order removal of the physical and digital signage and branding changes, restore the Kennedy Center’s lawful name, and prevent further attempts to rename it without congressional authorization.

WLG’s lead lawyers on the case are Senior Counsels Nathaniel Zelinsky and Kyle Freeny.  Also on the complaint from WLG are:  Thomas C. Green, John Aldock, Samantha P. Bateman, Elizabeth D. Collery, Mary L. Dohrmann, James I. Pearce, Barry Wm Levine.  WLG is litigating the case alongside Democracy Defenders Action."

January 1, 2026 is Public Domain Day: Works from 1930 are open to all, as are sound recordings from 1925!; Center for the Study of the Public Domain, December 2025

Jennifer Jenkins and James Boyle, Center for the Study of the Public Domain; January 1, 2026 is Public Domain Day: Works from 1930 are open to all, as are sound recordings from 1925!

"CC BY 4.0

Please note that this site is only about US law; the copyright terms in other countries are different.[2]

On January 1, 2026, thousands of copyrighted works from 1930 enter the US public domain, along with sound recordings from 1925. They will be free for all to copy, share, and build upon.[3] The literary highlights range from William Faulkner’s As I Lay Dying to Agatha Christie’s The Murder at the Vicarage and the first four Nancy Drew novels. From cartoons and comic strips, the characters Betty Boop, Pluto (originally named Rover), and Blondie and Dagwood made their first appearances. Films from the year featured Marlene Dietrich, Greta Garbo, the Marx Brothers, and John Wayne in his first leading role. Among the public domain compositions are I Got Rhythm, Georgia on My Mind, and Dream a Little Dream of Me. We are also celebrating paintings from Piet Mondrian and Paul Klee. Below you can find lists of some of the most notable books, characters, comics, and cartoons, films, songs, sound recordings, and art entering the public domain.[4] After each of them, we have provided an analysis of their significance. At the end of the article, we explain:

Why all of this matters
How do copyright and trademark law apply to characters?
What is the impact of the long copyright term?
What are the basic rules for determining whether something is public domain?
Conclusion"

I called my recipe book Sabzi – vegetables. But the name was trademarked. And my legal ordeal began; The Guardian, December 4, 2025

Yasmin Khan, The Guardian ; I called my recipe book Sabzi – vegetables. But the name was trademarked. And my legal ordeal began

"Vegetables, in my experience, rarely cause controversy. Yet last month I found myself in the middle of a legal storm over who gets to own the word sabzi – the Hindi, Urdu, Punjabi, Persian, Dari and Pashto word for cooked veg or fresh greens. It was a story as absurd as it was stressful, a chain of delis threatened me with legal action over the title of a book I had spent years creating. But what began as a personal legal headache soon morphed into something bigger, a story about how power and privilege still dominate conversations about cultural ownership in the UK.

When the email first landed in my inbox, I assumed it must be a wind-up. My editor at Bloomsbury had forwarded a solicitor’s letter addressed to me personally, care of my publishers. As I read it, my stomach dropped. A deli owner from Cornwall accused me of infringing her intellectual property over my cookbook Sabzi: Fresh Vegetarian Recipes for Every Day. Why? Because in 2022, she had trademarked the word sabzi to use for her business and any future products, including a cookbook she hoped to write one day.

My jaw clenched as I pored over pages of legal documentation, written in the punitive and aggressive tone of a firm gearing up for a fight. I was accused of “misrepresentation” (copying the deli’s brand), damaging its business and affecting its future growth, and they demanded detailed commercial reports about my work, including sales revenue, stock numbers and distribution contracts – information so intrusive that it felt like an audit. Buried in the legal jargon was a line that shook me. They reserved the right to seek the “destruction” of all items relating to their infringement claim. Reading the threat of my book being pulped was nothing short of devastating. It was also utterly enraging.

Because sabzi isn’t some cute exotic brand name, it’s part of the daily lexicon of more than a billion people across cultures and borders. In south Asia, it simply means cooked vegetables."

White Bird Clinic sues Willamette Valley Crisis Care over misuse of trade secrets, copyright infringement; Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB), November 24, 2025

Nathan Wilk , Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB); White Bird Clinic sues Willamette Valley Crisis Care over misuse of trade secrets, copyright infringement

"Eugene’s White Bird Clinic is suing a rival nonprofit, Willamette Valley Crisis Care, over copyright infringement and the stealing of trade secrets.

WVCC was founded after White Bird shuttered CAHOOTS services in Eugene in April. The new nonprofit hopes to launch a similar mobile crisis intervention program and has multiple former CAHOOTS staff members on board.

White Bird is now alleging that minutes before WVCC co-founder Alese “Dandy” Colehour sent a resignation letter to White Bird earlier this month, they downloaded confidential client information, training manuals and other materials to give to the newer non-profit.

White Bird is also accusing the WVCC of infringing on its CAHOOTS trademark through advertising materials and other public outreach efforts, and of passing off White Bird’s services as its own."

Eminem sues Australian beach brand 'Swim Shady'; BBC, November 18, 2025

Harry Sekulich, BBC; Eminem sues Australian beach brand 'Swim Shady'

"US rapper Eminem has taken legal action against an Australian beachwear company called Swim Shady, saying its name is too similar to his trademarked rap pseudonym Slim Shady. 

In September, Eminem – whose real name is Marshall B Mathers III – filed a petition to the US Patent and Trademark Office, calling for it to cancel a trademark that was granted to the company. US law requires the company to respond to the petition by next week."

‘Buy Nothing’ Was Their Everything. Then Came the Trademark Troubles.; The New York Times via The Seattle Times, November 16, 2025

  Emma Goldberg, The New York Times via The Seattle Times; ‘Buy Nothing’ Was Their Everything. Then Came the Trademark Troubles.

"“The decision to incorporate the Buy Nothing Project as a public benefit corporation came after years of rapid, grassroots growth,” Liesl Clark, the CEO of Buy Nothing, wrote in an email. “It became clear that to sustain this work, protect the integrity of the mission and continue to grow responsibly, we needed a formal structure.” 

Plenty of members of the local groups feel disgruntled about these top-down rules. But at the moment, many are particularly galled at the timing of the recent page takedowns.

“It’s anti the ethos of the whole idea of Buy Nothing to go around and start enforcing a trademark while we’re in the middle of a SNAP crisis,” said Aidan Grimshaw, one of the administrators of a San Francisco group that used the Buy Nothing name, referring to the federal government’s largest food-assistance program. “It feels like a sign of the times.” 

On Buy Nothing’s blog, the organization said that reviews of unregistered pages happen intermittently, unrelated to the news. “We understand that some removals have coincided with the rollback to federal SNAP benefits,” the statement read. “Timing of group removals is outside of our control, and no unregistered groups have been reported since the rollback began.” 

Clark, a filmmaker, and Rebecca Rockefeller, who had bounced between gigs and at points lived on food stamps, started the first Buy Nothing group in 2013. They were partly inspired by the sort of gifting economies that Clark saw while filming a documentary in the Himalayas. What began as a small Facebook group in Bainbridge Island, Washington, took off quickly, leading eventually to thousands more groups with millions of members. Participation in the groups ballooned during the pandemic, when people were confined to their homes and hungry for connection. In 2021, the two founders incorporated it as a public benefit corporation. 

Some members of the local groups complained that the creation of a new structure and new rules violated the loose and free spirit of the community. The administrators who run the San Francisco page were incensed when they received an email from Facebook on Oct. 30 informing them of their trademark infringement."

AI firm wins high court ruling after photo agency’s copyright claim; The Guardian, November 4, 2025

Robert Booth , The Guardian; AI firm wins high court ruling after photo agency’s copyright claim

"A London-based artificial intelligence firm has won a landmark high court case examining the legality of AI models using vast troves of copyrighted data without permission.

Stability AI, whose directors include the Oscar-winning film-maker behind Avatar, James Cameron, successfully resisted a claim from Getty Images that it had infringed the international photo agency’s copyright.

The ruling is seen as a blow to copyright owners’ exclusive right to reap the rewards of their work, with one senior lawyer, Rebecca Newman, a legal director at Addleshaw Goddard, warning it means “the UK’s secondary copyright regime is not strong enough to protect its creators”."

Can You Trademark Peanut Butter and Jelly? Smucker’s Says Yes.; The New York Times, October 17, 2025

 Yan Zhuang, The New York Times; Can You Trademark Peanut Butter and Jelly? Smucker’s Says Yes.

 "J.M. Smucker, the maker of Uncrustables, is suing Trader Joe’s, accusing the grocery store chain of infringing on its trademarks by selling a copycat version of its popular snack...

You generally can’t trademark foods. Sandwich recipes, or certain combinations of sandwich ingredients, are also “quite plainly not a copyrightable work,” an appeals judge ruled in 2015 in a case involving a Puerto Rico man who had attempted to trademark his chicken sandwich.

But you can trademark the specific shape or configuration of a food product. In this case, Smucker’s says, it has trademarked “a round pie-like shape with distinct peripheral undulated crimping” — a design it says Trader Joe’s has copied.

Smucker’s also accused Trader Joe’s of infringing on its trademark image of “a round crustless sandwich with a bite taken out showing filling on the inside,” which the grocery store chain uses on its packaging.

“Smucker does not take issue with others in the marketplace selling prepackaged, frozen, thaw-and-eat crustless sandwiches. But it cannot allow others to use Smucker’s valuable intellectual property to make such sales,” the company said in its filing."

Morgan & Morgan takes Disney to court over rights to feature ‘Steamboat Willie’ in law firm ads; News6, September 17, 2025

 Phil Landeros , News6; Morgan & Morgan takes Disney to court over rights to feature ‘Steamboat Willie’ in law firm ads

"Morgan & Morgan, Florida’s largest law firm, has filed a lawsuit asking a judge to declare the law firm’s planned use of the iconic film in an ad is protected against trademark claims from Disney. Steamboat Willie entered the public domain on Jan. 1, 2024, when Disney’s copyright protection expired.

The proposed ad depicts Mickey Mouse in a boat collision with a car, after which the driver seeks legal representation from Morgan & Morgan. According to the filing, before moving forward with the advertisement, the law firm sought assurance from Disney that the commercial wouldn’t trigger legal action. The filing said Disney would not comply."

Content Creators Want Congress To Revamp Decades-Old Copyright Law; Inc., September 25, 2025

BEN BUTLER , Inc., Content Creators Want Congress To Revamp Decades-Old Copyright Law

"“There’s a growing practice of using the [Digital Millennium Copyright Act] takedown tools built into platforms to restrict and shut down competition [which] are considered traditionally unfair trade practices,” Kayla Morán, a lawyer specializing in trademark and contract law, said last week during a hearing examining content creators and entrepreneurship before the House Committee on Small Business...

As content creation becomes more lucrative, creators can protect their IP by filing as LLCs, Morán said, shifting the liability from the person to the business. LLCs protect business assets from the owner of the business, creating a distinction between the two. Social media accounts can be protected as business assets, thus giving creators more legal protections if a podcast name gets stolen, for example, or in cases of impersonation.

But filing as an LLC as opposed to being a sole proprietorship requires registration fees and higher costs, which vary by state. And filing as an LLC doesn’t prevent the IP from being stolen, it would protect it from being pursued as an asset in a personal lawsuit against the creator. 

Morán and Christina Brennan, who runs a social media management company, said entrepreneurs they work with don’t have the knowledge of contract law and how taxes on social media earnings work.

One way to help bridge the disconnect, Morán suggests, would be for the Small Business Administration to provide guidance, plus access to lawyers that can advise on common challenges that bubble up for content creators, like with protecting IP."

Gotta Deport ‘Em All? How Should Nintendo Respond To Immigrant-Hunting Social Media Post From DHS?; Above The Law, September 24, 2025

Steven Chung , Above The Law; Gotta Deport ‘Em All? How Should Nintendo Respond To Immigrant-Hunting Social Media Post From DHS?

"Last Monday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) posted a one-minute video on X (formerly Twitter) and other social media platforms, splicing together clips from the Pokémon anime intro with footage of border patrol agents arresting individuals, all set to the first season’s theme song.

The post’s caption was the famous tagline “Gotta Catch ‘Em All!” At the video’s end, it displayed Pokémon cards featuring photos of convicted criminals facing potential deportation...

Reactions were sharply divided: some users found it hilarious and praised its creativity, while others condemned it as dehumanizing and inappropriate, especially for using a children’s franchise to promote immigration enforcement.

Commenters from both sides speculated on how Nintendo would respond, given the company’s reputation for aggressively enforcing its intellectual property rights — evidenced by actions like issuing DMCA takedowns against over 8,500 GitHub repositories for the Yuzu emulator in 2024 and targeting hundreds of fan games on platforms like Game Jolt in multiple waves since 2016. As of now, Nintendo and The Pokémon Company have not issued any public statement on the matter, despite requests for comment from media outlets. However, Nintendo has at least three viable options."

Using AI for Work Could Land You on the Receiving End of a Nasty Lawsuit; Futurism, August 23, 2025

 JOE WILKINS , Futurism; Using AI for Work Could Land You on the Receiving End of a Nasty Lawsuit

"For all its hype, artificial intelligence isn't without its psychological, environmental, and even spiritual hazards.

Perhaps the most pressing concern on an individual level, though, is that it puts users on the hook for a nearly infinite number of legal hazards — even at work, as it turns out.

A recent breakdown by The Register highlights the legal dangers of AI use, especially in corporate settings. If you use generative AI software to spit out graphics, press releases, logos, or videos, you and your employer could end up facing six-figure damages, the publication warns.

This is thanks to the vast archive of copyrighted data that virtually all commercial generative AI models are trained on.

The Register uses Nintendo's Mario as a prime example of how one might stumble, intentionally or not, into a massive copyright lawsuit, regardless of intent to infringe: if you use AI to generate a cutesy mascot for your plumbing company that looks too much like the iconic videogame character, you could easily find yourself in the legal crosshairs of the notoriously litigious corporation.

"The real harm comes from the attorney's fees that you can get saddled with," intellectual property lawyer Benjamin Bedrava told the publication. "Because you could have a hundred and fifty thousand dollars in attorney's fees over something where the license would have been fifteen hundred dollars.""

Sydney woman who sold a cartoon cat T-shirt told to pay US$100,000 in Grumpy Cat copyright case; The Guardian, April 25, 2025

Josh Taylor, The Guardian; Sydney woman who sold a cartoon cat T-shirt told to pay US$100,000 in Grumpy Cat copyright case

"Others across the globe have found themselves in similar situations. There are posts on Reddit asking what to do after finding a default judgment has been made against them.

“I had no idea ‘Grumpy Cat’ was a thing. ‘Grumpy Cat’ was not even mentioned on my design neither looked my design like their stupid cat,” one poster said.

Prof Graeme Austin, chair in private law at Victoria University in New Zealand, said US trademark law gives courts powers to impose tough damages awards in infringement cases, including statutory damages of up to US$200,000.

“Wholesale default judgment proceedings in trademark and copyright cases are a familiar strategy for intellectual property owners,” he said."

Utah Hockey Club scraps permanent Yeti nickname due to copyright dispute with cooler company; Yahoo Sports, January 29, 2025

 Jack Baer, Yahoo Sports; Utah Hockey Club scraps permanent Yeti nickname due to copyright dispute with cooler company

"The Utah Hockey Club is moving on from a nickname many believed would eventually become its permanent moniker, the Utah Yeti. The primary reason why: a cooler brand.

Mike Maughan, an executive of the team's parent company Smith Entertainment Group, confirmed to reporters Wednesday, per ESPN, that the team would pivot to a different selection of possible names after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office rejected the Yeti name and logo it submitted for approval.

The USPTO specifically cited a "likelihood of confusion" for consumers due to other companies and brands with a similar name, most notably the Yeti Cooler Company. Different companies can feature a similar name if they're in clearly different fields (e.g. the Beatles' Apple Corps and Apple Computers), but it seems likely an NHL team with the same name would clash with certain products, such as the cooler company's apparel line."

Top Trademark Cases in 2024 and What to Watch in 2025; IP Watchdog, December 23, 2024

DYAN FINGUERRA-DUCHARME & MALLORY CHANDLER, IP Watchdog; Top Trademark Cases in 2024 and What to Watch in 2025

"This year was an eventful one for trademark law—from reiterating the importance of “association” under the Lanham Act, to dispelling the notion that foreign conduct can create liability, to re-working the protection of expressive works after Jack Daniel’s. Below outlines a few of the important trademark decisions from 2024 and cases we are watching in 2025." 

Trademark Tussle: When Elves Land on the Naughty List; Holland & Knight IP/Decode Blog, December 23, 2024

Holland & Knight IP/Decode Blog ; Trademark Tussle: When Elves Land on the Naughty List

"CCA and B LLC, the company behind the "Elf on the Shelf" book, merchandise and the joy (or angst) of children everywhere, has found itself in a legal kerfuffle with Elena Jenkins (aka Elena Popova). The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, accuses Ms. Jenkins of willfully infringing CCA and B's ELF ON THE SHELF® trademarks and the copyrighted images of those mischievous elves without permission. On its wish list, CCA and B is asking for an injunction, monetary damages and destruction of all of Ms. Jenkins' rogue elves."