Yes, you are indeed correct. It means the original videos can be posted on YouTube and Disney can't request them be taken down. It doesn't mean you or I can take the Mickey Mouse character and make our own Mickey Mouse cartoons.
Edit: To add a trademark is valid as long as it's in use.
No. This is not true. Derivative works are a thing. If that were true Disney would never have been able to make their derivatives of Pinocchio or Snow White.
After Steamboat Willie expires you bloody damned well can make your own Mickey Mouse cartoon, comics, dolls, or whatever as long as you're not claiming to be Disney or using an exact copy of one of their later derivatives.
Derivative works of expired copyrights, yes. Disney doesn't own the plot to Snow White and never has because the Snow White story is in the public ___domain. Movies in the public ___domain can be reproduced in full or in part (as you mention, an exact copy) and the plot/storylines can be copied but Disney has a solid trademark claim on their characters. And that trademark claim continues indefinitely so long as Disney continues to use those characters in the marketplace.
If you make a cartoon using Mickey Mouse will reasonable consumers falsely attribute that cartoon to Disney? Yes. That
cartoon would likely cause confusion in the market place. Mickey Mouse is inextricably linked to Disney in the consumer's mind. You cannot use the Mickey Mouse character even if you never claim to be Disney. Further, I would argue that you cannot use the character even if you explicitly state you are not Disney because Disney's primary consumers are children and even with a disclaimer the mere use of the mark would likely cause consumer confusion.
Further, I would argue that you cannot use the character even if you explicitly state you are not Disney because Disney's primary consumers are children and even with a disclaimer the mere use of the mark would likely cause consumer confusion.
Ahh, but were I opposing counsel I would argue that the children young enough to be unable to read and comprehend the clear disclaimer that this is not a Disney production are also too young to have made the purchasing decision and therefore cannot be considered a market participant / consumer.
I would welcome you as opposing counsel because I would mop the floor with you. It's well-established that children can be and are consumers. In fact, both the FTC and CPSC have special regulations applicable to advertising and products for consumers under the age 12.
Could you be convinced to take over for opposing counsel on my current docket? I would be most appreciative.
We're not talking about under age 12 here though, we're talking about under age 5. And furthermore it is not convincing unless you find a precedent involving toddlers as consumers specifically in a trademark / passing-off case.
Doesn't "Steamboat Willie" predate even the 'Mickey Mouse' name, anyway? I think it would be quite feasible to make a derivative work of SW that still had so many deliberate changes compared to what people associate with the present-day Mickey Mouse trademark, that no one, not even a young child, would be expected to conflate the work with Disney's products. This is one thing that would not be possible if SW failed to enter the public ___domain. Of course, things would become more interesting-- and perhaps more challenging-- as later stuff started entering the public ___domain as well; just as with "Sherlock Holmes", many features of Mickey's character were slowly accreted over time.
It certainly doesn’t mean they can’t request that it be taken down (there are plenty of examples of companies requesting take downs for things they don’t have the copyright to, or infringed on the copyright themselves, only to turn around and request take down). It also doesn’t prevent deals between Disney and YouTube to prevent public ___domain works which Disney doesn’t want uploaded from being taken down (e.g. the first sale doctrine allows me to sell DVDs I own, but Amazon restricts DVD selling to only sellers with distribution/wholesaling agreements).
Edit: To add a trademark is valid as long as it's in use.