Walt Disney characters have a penchant for getting in the middle of contractual disputes. Just as the federal battle over Winnie the Pooh came to an end last week, Roger Rabbit popped up in a recent California Appellate decision, Wolf v. Walt Disney Pictures and Television.

At issue was the term "gross receipts," as it was used in a royalty agreement between Disney and Gary Wolf, the original creator of Roger Rabbit. Disney alleged that the term only included cash consideration received from the movie, while Wolf insisted that the term was more inclusive and applied to other valuable in-kind consideration, such as advertising and marketing.

In a decision overruling the trial court, the Court of Appeal reversed summary judgment for the entertainment conglomerate, and concluded that "gross receipts" may reasonably be interpreted to include valuable in-kind consideration as well as cash.

Toons...