Mickey Unchained: Disney says "yes" to AI, who's next?
- S B
- 14 minutes ago
- 4 min read
What happens when cultural icons can legally be replicated with AI tools?
The original version of the character known today as Mickey Mouse was created in 1928 when he appeared in Disney's Steamboat Willie. The cover image for this article was generated with AI and is in the likeness of the 1928 version. Mickey remains in black and white while the AI-generated world around him is in full color.
That version of the cultural icon entered the public domain January 1, 2024, after its copyright expired. In the U.S., the specific version of the character and short film from 1928 can now be freely shared, modified, or built upon by the public without copyright infringement.
Rather than fight the inevitable, Disney compromised.
In a shocking move Disney said "yes" to AI after years of fighting emerging AI animation studios like MidJourney. But was their decision one of strategy or one of necessity?
How Disney said "yes" to AI
Disney, like many studios, is facing uncharted times. Their content has been copied or referenced for decades, but now it can be done at scale.
On December 11, 2025, Disney announced a $1 billion partnership with OpenAI to integrate over 200 characters from Disney, Pixar, Marvel, and Star Wars into the AI company's video generation platform Sora.
Here is exactly what that partnership entails:
Official licensing: OpenAI's video tool can now legally generate videos featuring characters like Mickey Mouse, Iron Man, and Yoda.
The Disney+ loop: Perhaps the most surprising part of the deal is that select fan-made, AI-generated clips created with Sora will be curated and streamed on Disney+.
The guardrails: The deal explicitly excludes the likenesses and voices of real actors (so you can generate Iron Man, but not Robert Downey Jr.'s face or voice).
The strategy: Instead of fighting the flood of AI-generated content, Disney has decided to monetize it. If people are going to generate infinite Mickey Mouse content, Disney wants a cut.
Did Disney have a choice?
Disney had to adapt, and they did so in the way that made the most economic sense. But why partner with OpenAI, who doesn't lead in AI video generation? Runway is known for cinematic production and storytelling, Google is considered best in class. So why OpenAI, unless Disney fears the leading competitors or has plans to build their own AI generation engine?
Google is a rival, Runway is too niche, and OpenAI was willing to accept Disney's strict IP rules in exchange for legitimacy.
As someone who uses these tools, I am not sure if this was strategically brilliant or a band aid on a bigger problem. Disney has the capital to build in-house, why not do it?
When AI makes things easy (and free)
In the past, when content entered the public domain (like Shakespeare or Frankenstein), adapting it required significant skill, time, and money. You had to hire actors, write scripts, or draw animations by hand. Now, anyone can generate Steamboat Willie adaptations using tools like MidJourney, Runway, and Sora.
The result is a flood of content. Not just high-quality adaptations, but a massive volume of junk content, memes, and rapid experimentation. Cultural stewardship moves from a single corporate entity to the chaotic, collective internet. There's no quality control.
What you can and can't do
You can copy the 1928 design of Mickey, like I did in the cover image (black and white, rat-like nose, no gloves, simple eyes).
You cannot use modern versions of Mickey (red shorts, yellow shoes, gloves), which remain under copyright. Creators must be specific with their prompts to avoid generating a protected version.
You cannot use the trademark "Disney." You cannot create an AI Mickey that confuses consumers into thinking it was made by Disney.
Who is next?
The next decade will be chaotic for major IP holders. As these characters enter the public domain, AI companies can legally use them to train their models.
2025: Popeye the Sailor Man (now public domain in the U.S., already public domain in the EU)
2029: King Kong (the original 1933 film version)
2034: Superman (the Action Comics #1 version, a Superman who can't fly yet, only leap tall buildings)
2035: Batman (the Detective Comics #27 version)
2037: Wonder Woman
We might see oversaturation of these characters. When everyone can make content featuring them, perhaps the official versions will become more valuable. Or not. There's a reason fashion is a shadow of what it once was. Speed won against the fashion houses.
The age of imagination
Cultural icons are meaningful to us because they hold our memories. Will AI give rise to new icons? Will old icons fade against the backdrop of AI-generated figures like the AI models, influencers, and actresses that are emerging?
Is Disney fighting a losing battle? Or has the age of imagination arrived where anyone anywhere can prompt the next cultural icon into mainstream existence?
Join the Conversation
"AI is the tool, but the vision is human." — Sophia B.
👉 For weekly insights on navigating our AI-driven world, subscribe to AI & Me:
Let’s Connect
I’m exploring how generative AI is reshaping storytelling, science, and art — especially for those of us outside traditional creative industries.
About the Author
Sophia Banton is an AI leader working at the intersection of AI strategy, communication, and human impact. With a background in bioinformatics, public health, and data science, she brings a grounded, cross-disciplinary perspective to the adoption of emerging technologies.
Beyond technical applications, she explores GenAI’s creative potential through storytelling and short-form video, using experimentation to understand how generative models are reshaping narrative, communication, and visual expression.
