• Welcome to the Muppet Central Forum!
    You are viewing our forum as a guest. Join our free community to post topics and start private conversations. Please contact us if you need help.
  • 50th Anniversary Celebration
    Read fan reactions and let us know thoughts on Sesame Street's 50th anniversary special. The show debuts on PBS next Sunday at 7|6c and an official DVD is on the way.
  • 50 Years and Counting
    Read our review and discuss with fans the highly anticipated Sesame Street "50 Years and Counting" DVD set from Shout Factory featuring over five hours of beloved moments.
  • "Muppets Now" announced for Disney+
    It's finally official. A new, unscripted short-form series, “Muppets Now”, is coming to Disney+ in 2020. Let us know your thoughts on the Muppets big announcement.
  • The Dark Crystal: "Age of Resistance"
    After a 36 year wait, return to the great conjunction. The Dark Crystal "Age of Resistance" is a mesmerizing and beautiful prequel series now on Netflix. Renew your essence today.
  • Music is Everywhere
    Muppet Central Radio is now on TorontoCast, TuneIn and Apple Music. Listen to Muppet music 24/7 wherever you go with TuneIn and Apple apps and devices.

Disney gets sued by a toy company over Lotso Huggin' Bear

Little Robin

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2014
Messages
17
Reaction score
6
This has very little to do with a Bear in the Big Blue House Toy, supposedly. It comes down to a name. A company that supposedly filed the trademark for Lots OF Hugs sounds an awful lot like Lotso Huggin' Bear if you've got a banana in your ear. That's all it boils down to, imaginary confusion of the cartoon character and a completely different toy entirely that isn't even produced anymore.
According to the article provided in the first post, If I understand correctly the similar sounding name by itself is not the issue.

Diece-Lisa Industries of New Jersey who trademarked 'Lots of Hugs' stuffed bears in 1995 felt the Lots-O Huggin' Bear character with it's evil story line slandered the image of their product. They claim to fear marketing their own slogan now due to possible association with the Lotso character.

The Bear in the Blue House connection is simply because DLI licensed their 'hugging technology', whatever that means, to Disney for that show. Due to this, DLI claims Disney understood their image and thus defied it deliberately

So yes, it basically comes down to the name. Quite ridiculous if you ask me. Not only would you have to have cotten in your ears to mix up the names but as far as I can tell their 'Lots of Hugs' toy bears not resemblance to the Lotso character in appearance or function.
 

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,722
Reaction score
6,571
Lotso's character and motives didn't exactly stop kids from wanting Lotso toys. I don't see why they feel a similar name "tarnished" a toy that hasn't been made for quite some time. And if they still are, I sure as heck have never heard of them until now.

No matter what their logic is, it's a frivolous suit, and if this is one of the bizarre times Disney actually loses a copyright battle (like that whole King Louie business), then I'd be shocked.
 

Little Robin

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2014
Messages
17
Reaction score
6
Agreed, until I read this article I had never heard of a 'Lots of Hugs' bear...or else I've never recognized one as such. So it doesn't seem like they had a lot of popularity even prior to the film.
 

JJandJanice

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Messages
2,216
Reaction score
148
Yeah, these guys really don't have much of a case against Disney.
 

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,722
Reaction score
6,571
What makes this even more...uh... ironic, obnoxious, whatever you want to call it... why isn't Disney going after this toy company? Second one on the bottom...



Yeah... that looks a little too close to Animal, if you ask me (without the eyebrows or teeth). or at least Grover, so SW needs to call their lawyers at least.
 

Luke kun

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2014
Messages
641
Reaction score
484
One thing I've thought about: How much knowledge does the average person have on specific Bear in the Big Blue Merchandise? Has any Bear merchandise had the same level of fame as Tickle Me Elmo?

Besides Tickle Me Elmo, and possibly it's many knock-offs, I'd say casual Sesame Street fans are likely to know about Sleep 'n Snore Ernie (since that had the same insane amount of scarcity as Tickle me Elmo a year later, though it seems like it's not as popular anymore), the talking Big Bird from the 1980s (the one you could put read-long cassettes in so Big Bird would talk), and maybe Chicken Dance Elmo.

Though I guess a lot of Muppet/Henson properties don't have too many toys that casual fans would be aware of. For Muppets, I'd say fans would be aware of the Palisades action figures and maybe also the Fisher-Price ones, for Muppet Babies the McDonald's Happy Meals, and for Fraggle Rock, the McDonald's Happy Meals (and maybe the more recent Fraggle stuff from the last decade). I'd like to think that maybe the casual fan would be aware of all the Dinosaurs toys that came out (the PVCs, the Talking Baby, maybe the McDonald's happy meal) if only because there weren't many other Dinosaurs toys (were there any others?).

Then again, if I was a bigger fan of Bear, would I be aware of any speciffic Bear in the Big Blue House toys of the past?
I put Guns 'n Roses tapes in that Big Bird lol
 

mimitchi33

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2012
Messages
337
Reaction score
125
What makes this even more...uh... ironic, obnoxious, whatever you want to call it... why isn't Disney going after this toy company? Second one on the bottom...



Yeah... that looks a little too close to Animal, if you ask me (without the eyebrows or teeth). or at least Grover, so SW needs to call their lawyers at least.
It does look like an orange Grover!
 

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,722
Reaction score
6,571
You know... I haven't seen the Beast ballz commercial in some time. Either they were an abject failure, or Disney (or SW) caught wind of this and sent them cease and desists for Orange Grover/Eyebrowless, fangless Animal.
 

Little Robin

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2014
Messages
17
Reaction score
6
What makes this even more...uh... ironic, obnoxious, whatever you want to call it... why isn't Disney going after this toy company? Second one on the bottom...



Yeah... that looks a little too close to Animal, if you ask me (without the eyebrows or teeth). or at least Grover, so SW needs to call their lawyers at least.
I don't see the resemblance to Animal and just slight to Grover.
Until you specified I had no idea what you were pointing out.
 
Top