Caterpillar sues to block Disney movie release; ties CAT to "evil attacking army" of industrialists

Associated Press ^ | 10-15-03

[Brian S]

Caterpillar Inc. has sued to block next week's U.S. release of Disney's "George of the Jungle 2," alleging that the direct-to-DVD movie damages the heavy equipment maker's reputation.

The Peoria-based company's trademark infringement lawsuit contends the movie ties Caterpillar to an "evil attacking army" of industrialists seeking to destroy the jungle, a central theme of the Disney sequel.

[Petronski]

BOYCOTT DISNEY: a vortex of seductive evil™

[xm177e2]

Disney has no right to portray Caterpillar products as machines that are used to destroy trees. It's not fair. Caterpillar is a victim! </sarcasm>

[discostu]

CAT should just let this one go, Disney's direct to video sequels all suck anyway and only total Disney junkies buy them, and total Disney junkies are already leftist idjits that hate everything associated with the construction industry (like CAT) already.

[EggsAckley]

Personally, I say......Go get 'em, Caterpillar! I'm so sick of Disney and the direction they're gone.

[Support Free Republic]

I am just a humble 'bot.

These folks are not.

Brad's Gramma   
d14truth   
dalereed   
dutchess   
EdReform   
Fiddlstix   
Freedom'sWorthIt   
Gabz   
glock rocks   
Grampa Dave   
Great Dane   
JeanS   
John Robinson   
JustAmy   
justshe   
lodwick   
MinuteGal   
Mo1   
RottiBiz   
SheLion   
steveegg   
Tami   
WIMom 

Please thank the fundraising team. It's a thankless job. Except when we thank them!

[Alouette]

George and his computer-animated animal friends against an army of Caterpillar Wheel Loaders a narrator calls "bulldozing bullies."

They made a movie about Rachel Corrie?

[Aquinasfan]

Sue the pants off 'em.

[Maelstrom]

No...CAT should take as much $$$ out of Disney as is feasible.

CAT is one of the most respectable businesses within the United States with good people in charge and as employees.

Their equipment and logo is portrayed in a negative light when the fact of the matter is that their equipment is also absolutely necessary for good conservation practices including but not limited to fire-fighting and brush-clearing.

[Darksheare]

"While we have great respect for Caterpillar, we consider this without legal merit and we expect the audience will view these sequences for their comedic value and not take them seriously."

Yeah, right.
And they've bragged about being activist in their work before.
So the inclusion of CAT in the movie is done in an effort to be activist and malicious.
That was exactly their intent.

[Mark Felton]

CAT should sue the hell out of 'em!

CAT is already under heavy competitive pressures from Hyundai and other foreign manufacturers. They do not need another American company trashing their reputation.

Caterpillar equipment has done far more to advance the human condition than Disney.

[Fierce Allegiance]

thanks for your work on the fundraiser.

[discostu]

All they're gonna do is give the movie tons of free publicity. And they'll probably lose the case, haven't seen anybody else win a suit because the badguys use they're equipment in a bad movie. Picking battles is important, a battle over a cruddy sequel to a failed original that's going direct to video isn't worth fighting.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

CAT should just let this one go, Disney's direct to video sequels all suck anyway and only total Disney junkies buy them, and total Disney junkies are already leftist idjits that hate everything associated with the construction industry (like CAT) already.

I say, go get 'em. Disney has, for years, sued anybody and anything that was even remotely viewed as hurting their "trademark," including suing a day-care center that painted some pictures of Mickey Mouse, etc., on its walls.

Trademark Sauce for goose, or in this case the duck, is sauce for the gander.

[Fierce Allegiance]

i disagree. Disney would sue like crazy if CAT started putting mickey-mouse rops & fops (the roll bars, basicly) on dozers, even if it provided a safer superstructure.

Disney has no right to use the trademark of a manufacturer without permission, and should be liable for any damages CAT feels reasonable, and then some that would go directly to the effected stockholders (like me)

[discostu]

That sauce wasn't good for the goose. That mentality is one of the things that killed Disney's goodwill in the marketplace and led to many years in the red. CAT will spend a lot of money on lawyers and lose, but the publicity of a high profile case will increase sales of the movie. Gotta weigh the pros and cons.

[discostu]

The suit will cost them more than they'll gain.

[Between the Lines]

Equating Caterpillar Wheel Loaders to evil is just as ridiculous as equating SUVs to evil. But since Caterpillar wasn't the first vehicle to be equated with evil, they know what this will lead to. Caterpillar is right to sue.

[Sender]

I think if Disney used yellow machines that have the CAT logo, they meant to do harm. They could have used generic green bulldozers with no logo and had the same storyline.

[Vigilantcitizen]

And how many thousands of acres of trees did Disney mow down in Florida. Methinks I smell a hypocrite.