In a latest instance of a energy of social-media backlash, Disney-Pixar announced late yesterday that a association would behind off on a pierce that had generated an online conflict over a final few days.

As a Pixar-centric site Pixartimes.com reports, a studio behind such dear cinema as Toy Story 3 have long done it famous that they’re operative on a film associated to a Latin American holiday Día de Los Muertos—or, Day of a Dead. On May 6, Stitch Kingdom reported that Disney had filed applications to heading a word “Día de Los Muertos,” that some speculated would be movie’s title. The heading would have lonesome snacks, audio recordings, jewelry, cosmetics, pivotal bondage and lots of other intensity sell associated to a film. It was a pierce that lifted a madness of many who found sickening a thought of a vital media association perplexing to settle “ownership” of an critical informative event.

The pushback worked: Disney told Fronteras on Tuesday that not usually would a heading filing be withdrawn, though also a movie’s pretension would be changed.

(WATCH: A Live-Action Remake Of Toy Story)

But if Disney had not motionless to behind off, could they have successfully copyright a name of a holiday? In a way, says Marshall Leaffer, a copyright-law consultant and highbrow during Indiana Law.

“The Day of a Dead can achieve a heading stress if it’s used in a copyright sense,” he says. “If someone wants to use ‘Day of a Dead’ in describing a sold holiday, underneath ubiquitous heading beliefs and giveaway debate principles, a heading owners can't intent to it.”

In short, a trademark—not a copyright; U.S. law doesn’t yield copyright insurance for titles—would have stable Disney opposite others perplexing to emanate sell that referenced their movie, though it would not have given a association tenure of a thought behind a holiday, or a disproportion used in a phrase. In addition, Disney would substantially have had to infer that a word “Día de los Muertos” had a specific Pixar-only definition in sequence to be successful in requesting for a trademark. “We don’t wish to give terms to far-reaching a insurance if they don’t have any arrange of stress for a consumer,” he explains.

Leaffer draws a together to a rope The Cars: there’s a disproportion between perplexing to sell a illicit Cars t-shirt outward a unison venue (not authorised if they have a trademark) and perplexing to sell an we Love Cars t-shirt during a Honda dealership (fine). And a same proof would request to Cars—but a folks during Pixar substantially already know about that.