Drawing Trump Naked: Curbing the Right of Publicity to Protect Portrayals of Real People

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Kadri
Keyword(s):  
Right Of Publicity ◽  
Real People ◽  
The Right

The right of publicity in Chinese Law? A comment on the Michael Jeffrey Jordan case and comparative analysis with the US, UK, Germany, and the Asia Pacific

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 441-460
Author(s):  
Chenguo Zhang ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Mainland China ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Foreign Companies ◽  
Right Of Publicity ◽  
Unfair Competition Law ◽  
The Us ◽  
Trademark Registration ◽  
The Right

In Michael Jeffery Jordan v Chinese Trademark Review and Adjudication Board, the Supreme People's Court (SPC) set a precedent for foreign companies and celebrities enforcing their rights of publicity against malicious trademark registration in China. This article introduces the legal grounds of the SPC's deliberations on Jordan's claims and responds to the critiques of most Chinese commentators in the field of civil law. Deeply influenced by German law, mainland China's legal system strictly distinguishes between personality rights and property rights. Comparative analysis with the US, Germany, Japan, and Hong Kong indicates that different legal civilizations have developed different approaches to position the right of publicity logically in their legal systems. The Jordan decision indicates that the ‘right of the name’ is a prior right provided in Article 32 of the Trademark Law of the PRC. This article contends that the ‘right of the name’ as provided in the Chinese Anti-Unfair Competition Law differs from the ‘right of the name’ articulated in Article 110 of the General Principles of Civil Law (2017). The former concerns the commercial interest and property aspects of a celebrity's name, which is fairly similar to the right of publicity, while the latter regards the personality right. The further development of the right of publicity protection relies in mainland China on a consistent judicial practice.

Combating Cultural Appropriation in the American Southwest: Lessons from the Hopi Experience Concerning the Uses of Law

1995 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-154
Author(s):  
David Howes
Keyword(s):  
Native American ◽  
American Southwest ◽  
Cultural Preservation ◽  
Cultural Appropriation ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
Right Of Publicity ◽  
The Right

AbstractCultural appropriation involves the unauthorized use of elements of another culture (e.g., voice, practices, image or name) to the appropriator's commercial advantage. Cultural appropriation is experienced by some Native American cultures as an attack on their integrity which jeopardizes their very survival. The case of the Hopi Indians of Arizona is examined. The essay goes on to explore and evaluate various recourses which Native American peoples might employ to check the vulgarization and commercialization of their culture—namely the right to privacy, copyright, and the right of publicity. It is concluded that, to maximize cultural preservation, the right of publicity should be deployed.

Art versus Image: The First Amendment versus the Right of Publicity

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah K. Fields
Keyword(s):  
First Amendment ◽  
Right Of Publicity ◽  
Multiple Copies ◽  
Tiger Woods ◽  
The Right ◽  
First Time

This chapter explores Tiger Woods' lawsuit against the artist Rick Rush. In 1997, Woods made history by winning the prestigious Masters tournament for the first time and doing so by a record twelve strokes. Inspired by his victory, Rush created a serigraph of Woods' driving the ball while flanked by his caddie and his opponents' caddie. Floating in the sky above the scene were the faces of Jack Nicklaus, Arnold Palmer, and other legendary golfers. The painting was then reproduced as a lithograph and five thousand copies were offered for sale. When Woods learned of the artwork, he sued Rush for violating his right of publicity. Rush argued that his work was protected under the First Amendment as art, while Woods argued that the work was merely sports merchandise like a poster and that it was subject to the right of publicity. The court agreed with Rush and said that regardless of the multiple copies, it was still art and deserved full First Amendment protection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document