Comments on: 700-year-old picture of 'Mickey Mouse' found in Austrian church

700-year-old picture of 'Mickey Mouse' found in Austrian church

quonsar — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:10:37 -0800

The similarity of the painting to Mickey Mouse is so astounding that the Disney concern could even lose its world-wide copyright licence. Art historian Eduard Mahlknecht believes the similarity to Mickey is pure coincidence. He told Austrian daily Krone "St Christopher was often depicted surrounded by various animals and sea-life, and in this case something that resembles Mickey Mouse.

By: Mushkelley

Mushkelley — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:22:20 -0800

Imagine the world wide heartbreak when that crappy Mickey gets marketed as "The Original Mickey Mouse" and then idiot parents buy them for their kids. This could be worse than the Go-bots fiasco.

By: jazzkat11

jazzkat11 — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:23:48 -0800

If a miracle can be attributed to the mouse, I think we should move towards canonization..

By: quonsar

quonsar — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:32:16 -0800

i intended to include this final link in the post, but disney is still beaming mind control rays into my building and i plum forgot. free the mouse!

By: Cerebus

Cerebus — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:34:58 -0800

I'll bet it's a hoax. Someone will eventually discover that the Mickey head was a modern addition by some wag.

By: Ufez Jones

Ufez Jones — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:37:00 -0800

"It is most likely to be a drawing of a beaver or a weasel." Insert smarmy comment about Austrian Beaver here.

By: wanderingmind

wanderingmind — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:37:54 -0800

St Christopher was often depicted surrounded by various animals ...St. Christopher Robin?

By: ambivalentgirl

ambivalentgirl — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:41:22 -0800

Really, like drawing a circle with two smaller circles on top was the most genius idea ever? There are bound to be coincidences. It almost seems like a hoax though, kind of amusing. Plus, it's too late now. We all know the image of Mickey and his character, how are they going to erase that?

By: soyjoy

soyjoy — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:41:53 -0800

What a delightful dream it would be that Disney lose the ability to bully everyone on earth over this image. But you know it ain't gonna happen. Disney will just buy the church and market this image as "Classick Mickey" in the same way they've done with Shepherd's original Winnie-the-Pooh drawings.

By: Hildago

Hildago — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:45:34 -0800

Right on. Now could somebody please discover a 900 year-old Coke logo on some pottery fragments in Turkey?

By: iconomy

iconomy — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:53:15 -0800

I for one welcome our new Mic.........oh to hell with that. What I really want to know is, what is he doing with his left paw? I'll be laughing about your comment for at least the rest of the day, Mushkelley.

By: quonsar

quonsar — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:58:15 -0800

By: dwivian

dwivian — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:12:39 -0800

what is he doing with his left paw? You think the only willie he's driven was the steamboat?

By: zane9

zane9 — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:20:56 -0800

Art historian Eduard Mahlknecht says"It is most likely to be a drawing of a beaver or a weasel" Hey Eduard, I sure hope they don't let you loose during hunting season. Have you ever seen a real beaver? Come to Canada..we got lots of 'em.

By: UrbanFigaro

UrbanFigaro — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:28:53 -0800

Yeah, I gotta go with hoax.

By: scody

scody — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:37:51 -0800

Ub Iwerks, Time Traveller!

By: RJ Reynolds

RJ Reynolds — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:50:25 -0800

I'm no lawyer (yay for me!), but if this were real, I don't think it would do anything to their "world-wide copyright license" (which I think is a misnomer). They're not infringing on the non-trademarked rights of a recently discovered 700 year old picture, because that picture has no rights. In fact, if these Austrians start calling this "the cave Mickey Mouse" or whatever, they're the ones gonna be paying the Evil Mouse the big bucks. Lawyers, please feel free to correct me.

By: eddydamascene

eddydamascene — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:53:33 -0800

holy photoshop, quonar, that was only thirteen minutes.

By: eddydamascene

eddydamascene — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:53:54 -0800

By: quonsar

quonsar — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:56:25 -0800

one word: googleimagesearch

By: me3dia

me3dia — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 13:07:25 -0800

Hey, that's three words! You just smooshed them together! I agree with RJ here -- trademark didn't exist 700 years ago, and whatever entity painted the O.G. Mickey is long dead and gone, so trademark ownership is moot. On the other hand, I doubt Disney could claim prior art on something that predates America, so anyone making T-shirts, etc. could do so with impunity for the most part, unless a specific link to Mickey Mouse® is made. If I were those church people, though, I'd cash in on this.

By: kindall

kindall — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 13:12:44 -0800

"Prior art" is something that only applies to patents. You can use basically any symbol you like as a trademark, as long as it is distinctive and doesn't cause confusion in the market with another product. Coca-Cola could, say, start slapping a swastika on its drinks, and if they were the only one doing so, they'd essentially own the mark and be able to prevent anyone else from using it.

By: zekinskia

zekinskia — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 13:14:35 -0800

Hoax or not, at least it might draw some attention to the way Disney has been raping our copyright laws for the past half-century...

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 13:30:11 -0800

Well, what do you know. It's a small world after all, I guess. Oh come on, someone had to say it.

By: eddydamascene

eddydamascene — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:02:33 -0800

Anybody else notice the similarity between fresco Mickey and Botticelli's Venus? I feel a thesis forming.

By: PinkStainlessTail

PinkStainlessTail — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:04:39 -0800

Coca-Cola could, say, start slapping a swastika on its drinks Coke: It's Hitlerific!

By: eddydamascene

eddydamascene — Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:36:56 -0800

damn.