COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT — Disney’s Unauthorized Use of the RUNWAY MAGAZINE® Logo in Licensed Eudora Product Line.
Disney has built its global reputation on strict, aggressive, and uncompromising copyright enforcement. The company routinely issues takedowns, DMCA notices, and cease‑and‑desist letters against individuals, small creators, and independent artists for unauthorized use of its intellectual property. Disney’s external law firms actively pursue infringement claims, and the company is widely recognized for its zero‑tolerance approach to copyright violations.
Yet, Disney has faced longstanding public criticism regarding plagiarism allegations.
Against this backdrop, the unauthorized use of the copyrighted RUNWAY MAGAZINE® logo on a Disney‑licensed commercial product represents a serious and contradictory breach of the very standards Disney imposes on others.
The Global “Trade Name” Shield
1. The International Foundation (The Paris Convention) Under Article 8 of the Paris Convention (valid throughout Europe, UK, and the USA), a trade name is protected based on its existence and reputation in trade, regardless of the celebrity status of a fictional counterpart.
2. The United States Protection (The Lanham Act) Under 15 U.S. Code § 1126 (Section 44 of the Lanham Act), the US explicitly codified Article 8 of the Paris Convention. The law states:
“Trade names or commercial names… shall be protected without the obligation of filing or registration whether or not they form parts of marks.”
3. The United Kingdom Protection (Trade Marks Act 1994) In the UK, the “Section 44” equivalent is found in Section 2(2) of the Trade Marks Act 1994. It explicitly protects you even if you haven’t finished your registration:
“No proceedings lie to prevent or recover damages for the infringement of an unregistered trade mark as such; but nothing in this Act affects the law relating to passing off.”
The Product and the Licensing Context
Eudora, a cosmetics brand under Grupo Boticário, publicly announced its first licensing agreement with Disney for a limited‑edition makeup collection inspired by The Devil Wears Prada. The collection includes the Runway Magazine Palette, a 35‑shade eyeshadow palette priced at $234.99, promoted as an official Disney collaboration.
Promotional materials state:
“Eudora announces its first Disney licensing agreement with one of the biggest icons of fashion culture: The Devil Wears Prada.”
The palette is marketed as a Disney‑licensed item, distributed through official sales channels, and positioned as part of Disney’s IP‑based product line.
The Copyright Violation
The palette packaging does not use the fictional cinematic prop logo created for The Devil Wears Prada (cropped “A”, no descriptor, no trademark symbol, different typographic structure).
Instead, it reproduces the real, copyrighted RUNWAY MAGAZINE® logo, specifically:
- the distinctive rising “A” unique to the RUNWAY MAGAZINE® typographic signature
- the exact proportional layout of the registered mark
- the “MAGAZINE” descriptor
- a composition identical to the copyrighted logo published on Wikidata and runwaymagazines.com
This constitutes copyright infringement and Disney’s Unauthorized Use of the RUNWAY MAGAZINE® Logo on a commercial product.
Used here for reporting and documentation purposes.
Unauthorized Licensing and False Attribution
By licensing a product bearing the copyrighted RUNWAY MAGAZINE® logo, Disney has:
- authorized commercial distribution of RUNWAY MAGAZINE®’s copyrighted identity it does not own
- attributed authorship and ownership to Disney/20th Century Studios
- presented RUNWAY MAGAZINE®’s copyrighted identity as part of Disney’s IP portfolio
This is unauthorized licensing, false copyright attribution, and commercial exploitation of RUNWAY MAGAZINE®’s copyrighted identity.
Contradiction With Disney’s Enforcement Practices
Disney’s own enforcement history includes:
- aggressive pursuit of copyright violators
- takedowns against small creators and independent artists
- strict protection of its visual identities
- public criticism regarding alleged plagiarism in past productions
The unauthorized use of the RUNWAY MAGAZINE® logo stands in direct contradiction to the standards Disney demands from others.
The unauthorized use of the copyrighted RUNWAY MAGAZINE® logo on a Disney‑licensed commercial product is a documented act of copyright infringement, unauthorized licensing, and false attribution.
Furthermore, unauthorized use of copyrighted logo (sourced from Wikidata) on cosmetic boxes, alongside Disney / 20th Century Studios cinema theater photo booths featuring false advertising by Mercedes and L’Oréal, proves this is not ‘artistic set dressing,’ but a coordinated act of commercial parasitism designed to misappropriate our brand equity in a live market.
As just one of many documented examples of Disney’s unauthorized appropriation of the copyrighted RUNWAY MAGAZINE® logo, which constitutes another copyright infringement (logo sourced from our Wikidata):
Post Notice Continuation of Use
Across these campaigns, the RUNWAY MAGAZINE® masthead, self-made magazines were licensed by Disney to commercial partners as their property, and used in product‑driven advertising, retail merchandise, and promotional materials created and distributed by external partners. These authorizations were issued for commercial activity connected to Mercedes‑Benz Maybach, L’Oréal Paris, Unilever/TRESemmé, Grey Goose, and extended to apparel, accessories, sweets, novelty items, and other consumer products. The use of the masthead in these contexts was outward‑facing and commercial in nature, materially distinct from any internal prop use or narrative depiction within the film.
Commercial materials, partner campaigns, and derivative assets continued to be developed and sold after formal CEASE AND DESIST notice was issued to Disney and 20th Century Studio, and Formal Legal Notice to its partners March 16, 2026, despite explicit communication that any use of the RUNWAY MAGAZINE® identity required authorization.
Informational Notice
Disney’s actions—including the unauthorized use of the RUNWAY MAGAZINE® trade name and logo in retail environments, licensed products, digital commerce, and partner advertising—raise serious concerns involving:
- trade‑name violations
- trademark infringement (registrations in U.S. and Europe)
- copyright infringement
- commercial parasitism
- misrepresentation to partners
- attempts to suppress lawful journalism
The record demonstrates a consistent pattern of conduct throughout the management of this project and the associated partner campaigns—ranging from unauthorized commercial use of our identity, to misrepresentations of legal rights, to attempts to suppress protected press documentation.
Real‑World Commerce Standards
A. Jack Daniel’s v. VIP Products (U.S. Supreme Court)
The Court held that even when a use is expressive or humorous, the moment a mark functions as a source identifier in commerce, standard infringement laws apply. This means the Rogers Test does not protect real‑world retail activations, co‑promotions, or product marketing.
B. The “Pepsi Perfect” Precedent (Universal / Back to the Future II)
When Universal sought to release the fictional “Pepsi Perfect” into the real world, it did not rely on “artistic expression.” It executed a formal commercial licensing agreement with PepsiCo.
Disney’s assumption that it can bypass this step with RUNWAY MAGAZINE® by labeling retail activations is inconsistent with trade and intellectual property laws, with established industry practice.
When a corporation dismisses legal boundaries, asserts rights it does not possess, and attempts to silence the press, it reveals not an isolated misunderstanding but a posture. The events in this case reflect a pattern of conduct observed throughout the management of this project and the campaigns associated with it.
RUNWAY MAGAZINE® Issues Cease and Desist to Disney Over Unauthorized Commercial Use in The Devil Wears Prada 2
Message from Eleonora de Gray, Editor-in-Chief of RUNWAY MAGAZINE:
To the “legal talents” at Disney / 20th Century Studios: any further legal threats, or social media stalking by studio directed at me or our media will be immediately published on RUNWAY MAGAZINE digital platform, and reported to the International Associations of Journalists. My credentials: International Association of Journalists ID W73133, and the American Association of Journalists ID C553-3.
Furthermore, let’s clarify a point of professional etiquette: while our staff at our offices may not feel the need to flaunt a Bar Number, they — and our entire operation — are protected under the umbrella of these international journalistic associations and the legal safeguards of a registered media organization.
Disclaimer: Disney DOES NOT OWN trademarks for RUNWAY / RUNWAY MAGAZINE, DOES NOT HAVE COMMERCIAL USE until 2026, and CANNOT APPROPRIATE OUR IDENTITY. RUNWAY MAGAZINE® printed editions exist since 1995, operates under the internationally recognized protections for Freedom of Expression, Media Freedom, and the Safety of Journalists as affirmed in Article 11 of the Déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen (1789), Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (1950), the Loi du 29 juillet 1881 sur la liberté de la presse, U.S. constitutional protections for editorial commentary and satire, UNESCO’s standards for the independence of the press, and the protections against abusive litigation (SLAPP) afforded by the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive (2024/1069). Any effort to restrict, suppress, or unduly pressure a media outlet in the exercise of its journalistic functions stands in tension with these binding standards and the public‑interest role of the press.
