When Parody Meets IP: ‘Paddington Bear’ Rights Holders Sue Creators of Foul-Mouthed Spoof

The beloved, marmalade-loving bear from Darkest Peru is involved in a contentious legal battle across the pond. StudioCanal, the production company behind the highly successful Paddington film trilogy, and the bear’s rights holders, are suing the creators of a YouTube parody that depicts the classic children’s character as a foul-mouthed podcast host.

The lawsuit has been filed in the UK’s High Court against Avalon, the British production company famous for the satirical puppet series Spitting Image.

The specific content prompting the legal action is a short-form sketch posted to the Spitting Image YouTube channel over the summer. The video, titled “The Rest is Bulls*!t,” parodies the popular political podcast The Rest is Politics, featuring puppet versions of Prince Harry and Paddington Bear replacing the original hosts.

In the parody, the Paddington puppet is depicted in a distinctly un-family-friendly manner. The character is portrayed as sweary and profane, claiming to have played the fictional role of “Pablo Escobear” in the popular crime series Narcos, and interviewing a puppet version of Elon Musk. The sketch has proven popular, garnering over 500,000 views.

For StudioCanal, the aggressive legal response is understandable. The Paddington film trilogy—including the recent release Paddington in Peru—has grossed nearly $600 million worldwide, making the franchise a hugely valuable and carefully protected piece of intellectual property. The bear himself was created by author Michael Bond in the 1950s and has since become a global icon.

While the precise details of the complaint remain private, the lawsuit cites “copyright and design right concerns.” The case highlights the fine line between protected satirical parody and outright copyright infringement, especially when the parody depicts a family-friendly character in an explicitly adult and commercially successful manner.

The unedifying prospect of “Paddington vs. Paddington” in court showcases the growing tension when creative parodies utilize globally recognized and heavily monetized intellectual property.