Editing Fantasia (1940 film) (section)

=== Controversies ===
{{see also|Disney animators' strike}}

In April 1939, Philadelphia advertising agent Mark S. Tutelman filed an injunction suit in an attempt to prevent the film being made. Tutelman claimed the film originated from an idea of synchronizing animation with classical music which he first described to Stokowski in 1937, had prepared scenarios and orchestral arrangements at Stokowski's request without acknowledgement or credit, and demanded a cut of the film's proceeds.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-philadelphia-inquirer-sues-disney-an/128727126/|title=Sues Disney and Stokowski|newspaper=The Philadelphia Inquirer|date=April 8, 1939|via=Newspapers.com|page=11|access-date=July 23, 2023}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-morning-post-stokowski-and-disney-su/128727507/|title=Stokowski and Disney Sued in Tale of Scrambled Harmony|newspaper=The Morning Post|page=6|date=April 8, 1939|via=Newspapers.com|access-date=July 23, 2023}}</ref> In April 1940, Tutelman's case was dismissed.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-philadelphia-inquirer-abandons-suit/128727309/|title=Abandons Suit Against Disney|newspaper=The Philadelphia Inquirer|page=19|date=April 9, 1940|via=Newspapers.com|access-date=July 23, 2023}}</ref> In 1942, Tutelman filed a $25,000 damage suit against Stokowski, charging the conductor of a misappropriation of ideas without credit.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/daily-news-critic-says-fantasia-idea-sto/128727395/|title=Critic says ''Fantasia'' idea is stolen|newspaper=The Daily News|page=19|date=January 27, 1942|via=Newspapers.com|access-date=July 23, 2023}}</ref>

In April 1942, the [[Irish Film Classification Office|Irish Film Censor]] insisted the film cut Taylor's scientific introduction to ''The Rite of Spring'' due to its "materialistic portrayal of the [[Abiogenesis|origins of life]]".<ref>{{cite web|date=30 April 1942|title=Irish Film Censors' Records – ''Fantasia''|url=https://www.tcd.ie/irishfilm/censor/show.php?fid=3386|website=Trinity College Dublin|access-date=June 24, 2021}}</ref>

In the 1960s, four shots from ''The Pastoral Symphony'' were removed that depicted two characters in a racially stereotyped manner. A black centaurette called Sunflower was depicted polishing the hooves of a white centaurette, and a second named Otika appeared briefly during the procession scenes with Bacchus and his followers.{{sfn|Cohen|p=69}} The characters were initially removed for a 1963 re-run of the ''[[Disney anthology television series|Disneyland]]'' episode ''Magic and Music'', which originally aired uncut in 1958. Disney himself approved of the changes.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Korkis |first1=Jim |title=Lost ''Fantasia'': The Disappearance of Sunflower |url=https://cartoonresearch.com/index.php/lost-fantasia-the-disappearance-of-sunflower/ |website=Cartoon Research |date=27 March 2020 |access-date=28 June 2023}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Korkis |first1=Jim |title=Whatever Happened to Little Sunflower? |url=https://www.mouseplanet.com/9413/Whatever_Happened_to_Little_Sunflower |website=MousePLanet |date=27 October 2010 |access-date=28 June 2023}}</ref> The episode aired uncut on television once again in 1966, before the edits were incorporated into the film's 1969 theatrical reissue and has remained on all releases since.{{sfn|Cohen|p=201}}{{sfn|Ebert|1997|p=176}} [[John Carnochan]], the editor of the 1991 video release, said: "It's sort of appalling to me that these stereotypes were ever put in".<ref>{{cite magazine|last=Daly |first=Steve |title=New Rating for ''Fantasia'': PC |magazine=[[Entertainment Weekly]]|date=November 29, 1991 | url=https://ew.com/article/1991/11/29/changes-restored-version-fantasia/| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081222213520/https://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,316319,00.html |access-date=August 16, 2007 |url-status=live |archive-date=December 22, 2008}}</ref> Film critic Roger Ebert commented on the edit: "While the original film should, of course, be preserved for historical purposes, there is no need for the general release version to perpetrate racist stereotypes in a film designed primarily for children."{{sfn|Ebert|1997|p=176}}

In May 1992, the Philadelphia Orchestra Association filed a lawsuit against The Walt Disney Company and [[Buena Vista Home Video]]. The orchestra maintained that as a co-creator of ''Fantasia'', the group was entitled to half of the estimated $120&nbsp;million in profits from video and laser disc sales.<ref name=nytimessuit1992>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1992/05/07/movies/fantasia-orchestra-sues-disney.html |title=''Fantasia'' Orchestra Sues Disney|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|first=Allan |last=Kozinn|author-link=Allan Kozinn|date=May 7, 1992 |access-date=January 21, 2011}}</ref> The orchestra dropped its case in 1994 when the two parties reached an undisclosed settlement out of court.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=vwwxAAAAIBAJ&pg=6622%2C7376551 |title= Philadelphia Orchestra drops Disney lawsuit|newspaper=[[The Daily Gazette]]|date=October 26, 1994 |access-date=February 12, 2011 |via=Google News Archive}}</ref> British music publisher [[Boosey & Hawkes]] filed a further lawsuit in 1993, contending that Disney did not have the rights to distribute ''The Rite of Spring'' in the 1991 video releases because the permission granted to Disney by Stravinsky in 1940 was only in the context of a film to be shown in theaters.<ref name=Barron>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1993/01/22/nyregion/who-owns-the-rights-to-rite.html |title= Who owns the rights to ''Rite''?|newspaper=[[The New York Times]]|first=James|last=Barron|author-link=James Barron (journalist)|date=January 22, 1993 |access-date=January 21, 2011}}</ref> A [[United States District Court for the Southern District of New York|federal district court]] backed Boosey & Hawkes's case in 1996,<ref>{{cite court |litigants=Boosey & Hawkes Music Publishers v. Walt Disney |vol=934 |reporter=F. Supp. |opinion=119 |pinpoint= |court=[[United States District Court for the Southern District of New York|S.D.N.Y.]] |date=1996-08-09 |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/934/119/1955750/ |access-date=2022-06-27}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.newspapers.com/clip/90513964/the-orlando-sentinel/ |title=Music Publisher: Court Backs Its ''Fantasia'' Case |newspaper=[[Orlando Sentinel]]|page=C10 |date=August 10, 1996 |access-date=December 13, 2021 |via=Newspapers.com}} {{Open access}}</ref> but the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit|Second Circuit Court of Appeals]] reversed the ruling in 1998, stating that Disney's original "license for motion picture rights extends to video format distribution".<ref>{{cite court |litigants=Boosey & Hawkes Music Publishers v. Walt Disney |vol=145 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=481 |court=[[United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit|2d Cir.]] |date=1998-04-30 |url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1396668.html |access-date=2022-06-27}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://library.findlaw.com/1998/Oct/1/127402.html |title=Second Circuit Reversal Regarding Disney's ''Fantasia'' on Videocassettes |work=[[FindLaw]]|first=Stanley|last=Rothenberg|author-link=Stanley Rothenberg|date=October 1998 |access-date=May 10, 2011 |archive-date=August 7, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110807132554/http://library.findlaw.com/1998/Oct/1/127402.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>