An image that can be found in an image provider’s database marked “public domain” does not make it so. Obviously, the recent B.J. Novak odyssey illustrates how far things can go sometimes, but that does not mean his image actually was public domain, that ad agencies and companies were free to use his image on products or in advertising, or that he was without recourse (though he has indicated not being inclined to pursue the end-users). The term “public domain” (like many aspects of intellectual property) gets misused often. The headline of a recent article “How your photo could end up in the public domain – and used in ads around the world” takes a substantial leap and demonstrates the point, though the substance of the article may be helpful.
November 7, 2021 No Comments »
Tags: @FaberLaw, ad agencies, appropriation, B.J. Novak image, celebrity lawsuits, copyright, detrimental reliance, http://www.LuminaryGroup.com, http://www.rightofpublicity.com, https://www.LuminaryGroup.com, https://www.RightOfPublicity.com, image providers, infringement, IU law school, leading online right of publicity resource, litigation expert, McKinney School of Law, misleading headlines, professor of right of publicity, public domain, publicity rights expert, recourse, Right of Publicity, right of publicity analysis, right of publicity discussion, Right of Publicity expert, right of publicity information, right of publicity infringement, right of publicity issues, right of publicity law school class, right of publicity litigation, right of publicity professor, right of publicity valuation, RightofPublicity.com, stock images, use of celebrities in advertising, valuation, worldwide