(C) BoingBoing
This story was originally published by BoingBoing and is unaltered.
 . . . . . . . . . .



Peppa Pig prevails over Wolfoo in copyright case [1]

['Rob Beschizza']

Date: 2026-07-29  

Peppa Pig's proprietors today won a copyright battle in London's High Court against the creators of Wolfoo, a YouTube character long accused of imitating the petulant piglet. It's not the similar style that mattered, at least in this part of the fight, but the direct lifting of audio clips from the British childrens' show.

A judge has ordered all videos featuring popular animated character Wolfoo to be removed from platforms including YouTube after ruling that the cartoon illegally copied audio from Peppa Pig.

The case, pitching Hasbro against Vietnamese studio Sconnect, turned on dozens of audio clips (snorts, giggles, exclamations and other noises) lifted from Peppa Pig episodes and use in Wolfoo videos. The defendants admitted using the clips in early clips (blaming a third party contractor for their inclusion), claimed everything produced recently was originally-sourced, but spectrographic analysis demonstrated ongoing reuse.

Sconnect's other defenses were rejected by the court, with the judge writing that they amounted to "the raising of much smoke", as quoted in a legal analysis by Thomas Hood at The IPKat.

The message this judgment leaves for those tackling a summary judgment application is spelt out quite clearly at [84] of Smith J's judgment; the points of the Defendants "represent the raising of much smoke but, in the face of a compelling and comprehensive plea of sound recording copyright infringement and a significant body of supporting evidence, they lack substance." The Defendants did not present cogent meaningful responses to the points raised in this case, standing as a stark warning to defendants, domestic and international, of the need to ensure responses to a summary judgment application provide more than bare assertions to ensure survival. To quote Peppa, 'If you jump in muddy puddles, you must wear your boots!'"

Cited was the Pelham v. Kraftwerk case, which found even brief samples infringing if they are recognizable.

Contrary to some reportage today, this ruling was not about Wolfoo looking like Peppa Pig, though Hasbo has made hay of that too and lodged trademark claims. Courts have been cooler on those claims; you can't own a style.

YouTube has already removed thousands of Wolfoo videos at Hasbro's request, cutting Wolfoo's monthly views from about 3 billion to 1 billion—it had, at one point, overtaken the pig's viewership there. Peppa Pig, though, airs in 180 countries and generates more than $1 billion a year in hard cash for Hasbro. And now, if it obeys the court, the rest must go too.

The Wikipedia article suggests that Peppa fans chancing across Wolfoo are in for a classic Elsagate YouTube experience, with gross-out humor, relentless depictions of defecation and urination, medical problems, etc.

Peppa Pig owners win copyright battle against 'impostor' Wolfoo [BBC News]

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://boingboing.net/2026/07/29/peppa-pig-prevails-over-wolfoo-in-copyright-case.html

Published and (C) by BoingBoing
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/boingboing/