Rep. Lauren Boebert tried to send a rhetorical shot across Disney’s bow this week, though she struggled a bit with the details. “Next year, the woke Disney lobbyists will ask Congress to extend Micky Mouse’s trademark,” the Colorado Republican wrote on Twitter. “I think not.”
Boebert misspelled the character’s name — it’s Mickey Mouse, not Micky Mouse — and Disney’s interest relates to copyrights, not trademarks, but details aside, the far-right congresswoman was referencing a looming political fight that’s likely to be quite contentious.
National Review, a leading conservative magazine, published this report yesterday.
Disney’s copyright on its signature Steamboat Willie Mickey Mouse — from the 1928 short film of the same name — is set to expire on January 1, 2024…. In the past, both the company and legislature have sprung into action to keep the depiction out of the public domain. This time, it might be more difficult to secure such an extension.
The article noted that in recent decades, Disney lobbyists have successfully secured a couple of copyrights extensions, including an 1998 effort that was so uncontroversial on Capitol Hill that it cleared both chambers of the Republican-led Congress on voice votes, and was signed into law by a Democratic president.
But, the report added, “There is little chance that a third extension will pass so smoothly, as several prominent Republicans, who will in all likelihood find themselves in the majority in both houses of Congress after the midterms, tell National Review that they would oppose such a measure.”
It is not because GOP lawmakers have suddenly discovered deeply held concerns over copyright extensions as they relate to intellectual property law. On the contrary, the resistance is the result of the Republicans’ culture war — and the degree to which they see Disney as an opponent in the larger social conflict.
Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, for example, told National Review that Disney “seems to now have given in to the woke mob.”
There’s no great mystery as to how congressional conservatives have arrived at such a conclusion. Florida Republicans approved what some have dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” policy, and Disney — a major force in the Sunshine State — eventually criticized the GOP’s anti-LGBTQ measure.
As MSNBC colleague Ja’han Jones explained, Florida Republicans and their allies wasted no time making plans to retaliate against the company for daring to say something uncomplimentary. In fact, as GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis said the company’s criticism “crossed the line,” Republican policymakers in the state announced plans to re-evaluate Disney’s special corporate benefits in Florida.
Now, evidently, such attitudes have spread from Tallahassee to Washington, D.C. Even Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida — who’d be ordinarily expected to side with one of his home state’s biggest companies — condemned Disney’s leadership for engaging in “radical activism.”
To the extent that reality matters, that’s not what Disney did. The so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law is a regressive policy that’s tough to defend on the merits. As Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern explained as the measure worked its way through the GOP-led state legislature, the proposal “uses intentionally vague language to outlaw a huge amount of speech about LGBTQ people, families, and issues — not just sex — in every grade. And it relies upon a vigilante enforcement mechanism to chill an even broader amount of speech by subjecting violators to humiliating investigations and ruinous lawsuits.”
If anyone is guilty of “radical activism,” it’s the measure’s proponents, not its critics.
But for Republicans, Disney has an obligation not to criticize anything the GOP does — and because the corporate giant fell out of line, it must now be punished.








