Is a Movie Car Considered a Copyrighted Character? A Major Court Recently Ruled | Carscoops

      This marks the second significant triumph against an entity long regarded as a nuisance to enthusiasts.

      17 hours ago

      by Stephen Rivers

      Shelby has won a lawsuit against the widow of the director of the original Gone in 60 Seconds. The court likened Eleanor to the Batmobile, highlighting its inconsistent character traits. This ruling simplifies the process for Mustang enthusiasts aiming to create their own Eleanor tribute cars.

      Since the early 2000s, individuals wishing to build a Shelby Mustang GT500 needed to be cautious about the final appearance. The widow of the original film's director was known for taking legal action against those who crafted vehicles resembling the Mustang featured in the film, named Eleanor. Following a court defeat in 2022, she pursued an appeal, which she has now lost again.

      Denise Halicki, the widow, argued that Eleanor was a character and therefore protected by copyright. For years, she successfully persuaded courts of this view, achieving significant victories. In 2020, she targeted YouTuber Chris Steinbacher for constructing an Eleanor tribute car. Not only did she manage to shut down his project, but he also lost the vehicle.

      Read: The ’67 Ghost Is A Mustang Like No Other

      Now, those interested in building such a car can feel more at ease after an appeals court dismissed Halicki’s case for a second time. This ruling was made by a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The judges' opinion sounded almost irritable, stating, “Appellants’ argument stalls at the starting line: we conclude that Eleanor is not a character, much less subject to copyright.” Why so unforgiving towards what once seemed like a valid challenge?

      The "Eleanor" Test: No Character, Just Car

      The crux of the matter revolved around the car itself. One judge remarked, “Eleanor was not eligible for character copyright protection because it (1) lacked conceptual qualities, (2) had no consistent traits, and (3) was not particularly distinctive.” These aspects are part of the court's Towle test, named after a previous copyright case.

      The judges drew a comparison between Eleanor and the Batmobile, noting their apparent similarities. The distinction, however, lies in the fact that the Batmobile occasionally acts independently of Bruce Wayne's influence, suggesting a degree of sentience. In contrast, Eleanor does not possess such qualities. “Eleanor is merely one of numerous named cars in the films. Thus, Eleanor resembles a prop more than a character,” the judges explained.

      In the second part of the test, the Mustang again fell short, as it has appeared in various forms. “Throughout four films and eleven iterations, Eleanor lacks consistent traits. For instance, Eleanor’s physical appearance often changes across the films, appearing as a yellow and black Fastback Mustang, a gray and black Shelby GT-500 Mustang, and a weathered, paintless Mustang needing repairs.”

      Ultimately, the judges concluded that Eleanor failed the third part of the test due to its similarity to many other cars in different films. Once more, they compared it to the Batmobile, which has a distinctive "Bat-like appearance." A simpler analogy might be drawn with the cars from the Pixar film Cars, which possess personality, are recognizable, and consistent. They exhibit autonomy, thereby passing all the same tests.

      A Win for Shelby

      It’s important to note that the lawsuit involved Halicki and Shelby, the company that partnered with Ford to create the original Shelby Mustang. Not only does the automaker now enjoy greater freedom to develop such cars, but the judges also determined that Shelby should receive declaratory relief to clarify that it does not violate Halicki’s rights.

      Ultimately, this means that those looking to build a Mustang similar to the one in Gone in 60 Seconds can proceed with more legal support backing their freedom. Nevertheless, since this case reached the appeals court, there’s no guarantee that Halicki won’t continue to pursue actions against some individuals.