Dr. Seuss estate has lost an appeal to block the parody play “Who’s Holiday”

The play “Who’s Holiday”, which is set to hit Broadway in the fall this year, drew the ire of the estate of Theodor Seuss Geisel (better known as Dr. Seuss) for using characters from How the Grinch Stole Christmas in a story featuring adult subject matter and humor, including bestiality, drug abuse, teenage pregnancy, prison culture, and so much more. The story takes place in Whoville and follows the grown-up Cindy Lou, who lives in a trailer pack and is now a hardened drug abuser who has done time for murdering her husband.




The ‘Who’s Holiday’ a play by Matthew Lombardo can now been here or there, can now be seen everywhere and everywhere. Specifically though it can now be seen on Broadway in New York city in a limited engagement later this year, after the courts upheld a ruling that the play is a parody and within the bounds of fair use.

READ  Boy Calls 911 to Stop the Grinch from Stealing Christmas

Dr.Seuss Enterprises had appealed a lower court ruling from last September, but the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Matthew Lombardo the plays writer, on July 6th 2018. The U.S. Court of Appeals found the the ‘Who’s Holiday’ is a protected under the ground of the First Amendment. The decision has come less then two weeks after the first hearing of oral arguments on June 26 2018.

“The 2nd Circuit’s decision is a win for both Mr. Lombardo and the First Amendment,” said Lombardo’s attorney, Jordan Greenberger, in a statement. “On its face the play is a parody, and we are thrilled that the court recognized Mr. Lombardo’s right of free expression.”

READ  How Christmas BROKE The Grinch! (Dr Seuss How The Grinch Stole Christmas)




“We find Dr. Seuss Enterprises’ arguments to be without merit,” the ruling from the Court of Appeals stated. “The district court correctly determined that the play is a parody, imitating the style of the Grinch for comedic effect and to mock the naïve, happy world of the Whos.”

The ruling also noted, “The public’s interest in free speech here far outweighs DSE’s interest in protecting its trademarks.”

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: