And now people are accusing the upcoming Disney movie Hexed of being a ripoff of Owl House because apparently Owl House invented the idea of a hero being transported to a magical world.

I understand Owl House fans are mad that Disney canceled the show prematurely and made the ending rushed. I agree that Disney shouldn't have done that. But I'm not going to fault Disney for making another story where a character is transported to a magical world. Heck, Disney did it decades ago with Alice in Wonderland and with Peter Pan. They also did it with the Chronicles of Narnia and there are many more examples, both Disney and non-Disney

I see. From wikipedia:

In 1973, a promotional booklet was released with a public announcement by Williams about the status of his project:

Nasrudin was found to be too verbal and not suitable for animation, therefore Nasrudin as a character and the Nasrudin stories were dropped as a project. However, the many years work spent on painstaking research into the beauty of Oriental art has been retained. Loosely based on elements in the Arabian Nights stories, an entirely new and original film is now the main project of the Williams Studio. Therefore any publicity references to the old character of Nasrudin are now obsolete.

So it seems the Thief and the Cobbler was based in part on the Arabian Nights, and the original plot was also from Arab folklore.

So in other words, Aladdin is merely based on the same work of classic literature, which I believe is public domain. So allegations of plagiarism are foolish, unless all references to Arab folklore are now off the table too.

One of the comments summarizes it best: "Damn, can't believe kimba invented Africa, and real life just ripped them off like that."

That's pretty funny. I might watch the video another day. From your comment I gather enough to conclude that the main premise of the accusation is "Shakespeare told by animals," and I concur that that's laughable.