[ziml77]

> To successfully make a parody case in regards to trademark the parody itself must make it obvious that the defendant is not in anyway connected to the owner of the trademarked thing. The Morgan and Morgan ad doesn't do that; without the disclaimer at the beginning it wouldn't be obvious that the ad wasn't a animation created by Disney.

This is what I was wondering about. Do those disclaimers make it okay? Because without that context it certainly feels like this ad could be officially endorsed by Disney. And that seems to be exactly the kind of thing trademark law is meant to deal with: avoiding trust problems from people being misled about who is selling them what.