Comments for Right Of Publicity

Comment on PETA launches new ad featuring Michelle Obama without First Lady’s permission by jfaber

jfaber — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:04:30 +0000

Thanks for the question, Jeff. In fact, even politicians have a right of publicity that can be enforced, at least under certain circumstances. As such, it is inaccurate to assume that the “likenesses” of politicians are in the public domain. When the use involves an advertisement or commercial product, in most instances even a politician will have recourse through recognition of his or her right of publicity and related intellectual property interests. I hope this is helpful.

Comment on PETA launches new ad featuring Michelle Obama without First Lady’s permission by Jeff

Jeff — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 22:51:54 +0000

When is a likeness considered to be in the public domain and therefore obviate the need for a license agreement pursuant to a commercial product development? I read on http://www.t-shirtforums.com/general-t-shirt-selling-discussion/t35556.html that likenesses of politicians are the only likenesses in the public domain.

Comment on President Obama infringements? by White House Claiming Quasi-Copyright Over Official Pics « shouting loudly

White House Claiming Quasi-Copyright Over Official Pics « shouting loudly — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 17:45:14 +0000

[...] I think some applications of this right can be troublesome, but others make good sense. In any case, I failed to account for it in the first version of this post. Here’s a good post discussing the frequent uses of Obama’s image as a question of the right of publicity. [...]

Comment on MLB Cardinals Manager La Russa files suit over fake Twitter page by Liiga

Liiga — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 22:16:24 +0000

Hey very nice blog!! will bookmark your blog and take the feeds also…

Comment on FTC Proposed Regulations Concerning Celebrity Endorsements by I see dead people. « Can someone please explain…?

I see dead people. « Can someone please explain…? — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:22:06 +0000

[...] the FTC is considering new regulations concerning celebrity endorsements, according to this blog post by Jonathan Faber, licensing expert and former president of “CMG Worldwide, Inc., whose clients [...]

Comment on TheJayLenoShow.com belongs to Jay Leno after UDRP ruling in Leno’s favor by Sanen Azok

Sanen Azok — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 04:51:38 +0000

I think that the delay argument failing is the most important part of this case. Bad faith domain name cases are a dime a dozen. Using the domain name for forwarding is a virtual guarantee of being found guilty of using someone else’s popularity as a free ride. I agree with the ruling - doing something bad for five years doesn’t excuse it. It would be different if Mr. Leno had approved of the idea, reneged, and did nothing for many years. Just because he didn’t go after this guy is no reason to allow him to continue.

Comment on MLB Cardinals Manager La Russa files suit over fake Twitter page by Connor

Connor — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 06:48:40 +0000

Not being able to remember the customized text is adding one more step in pushing a blog post. With Twitterfeed (erotikblogg+twitter, I don

Comment on TheJayLenoShow.com belongs to Jay Leno after UDRP ruling in Leno’s favor by Chris Kalogerson

Chris Kalogerson — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:33:28 +0000

Congrats on new show. I note that the show is looking for unusual musical collaborations. My daughter Callie & I are Greek-American musicians. We play Greek & music from around the world. Check my website for pictures, sound & info on our music.

Comment on TheJayLenoShow.com belongs to Jay Leno after UDRP ruling in Leno’s favor by jfaber

jfaber — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:43:12 +0000

It’s certainly more than just a popularity contest, and money doesn’t really come into play based on the procedure of domain arbitrations. For the most part, there is no in-person testimony, no discovery, no meetings, just written briefs that are submitted, thereby reducing the possibility of monetary influence or other factors. There have been a good number of decisions that went against the personality. In all likelihood, if your legal name from birth was Jay Leno and you had a TV show by that name, there would have been some trademark issues and communications from the network or producers of the show to work something out with you. At that point, and in your hypothetical, the issues would have gone well beyond just a domain name concern. But for the sake of conversation, imagining that you did have a show by that name since 2004, and it was your name, and somehow the other issues were not in play, then you very well may have won the domain name ruling based on their established policies.

Comment on TheJayLenoShow.com belongs to Jay Leno after UDRP ruling in Leno’s favor by Matt

Matt — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 17:52:46 +0000

What if my legal name from birth was Jay Leno and I had a local cable TV show since 2004 called the Jay Leno Show? Is it just a popularity contest with WIPO where the one who’s more well-known and well-moneyed gets privilege?