Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

<b>False Endorsement; Right of Publicity</b>

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
December 28, 2006

The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey preliminarily enjoined further distribution and ordered the recall of the book 'Legit Baller,' which features an allegedly unauthorized, prominent use of photographs of popular R&B singer/producer Marc Dorsey on its covers. But the court declined to order a recall of the defendant publisher's other books that included advertisements of 'Legit Baller.' Dorsey v. Black Pearl Books Inc., 06-2940(JAG).

Dorsey's claims include false endorsement under the federal Lanham Act and violation of right of publicity under New Jersey common law. Dorsey, who previously hadn't authorized his image to endorse any product, contended he was receiving many comments from people asking why he would associate himself with 'Legit Baller,' criticized by the New York Times in an article titled 'Their Eyes Were Reading Smut.' Pearl Books also used Dorsey's image in advertising pamphlets and on its Web site.

In considering Dorsey's Lanham Act claim, the district court, located within the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, relied on a test set forth in the Ninth Circuit's Downing v. Abercrombie & Fitch, 265 F.3d 994 (9th Cir. 2001). Under this test, the district court explained in its unpublished opinion: 'With [the] evidence illustrating his extensive involvement in R&B music and African-American films, such as those produced and directed by Spike Lee, as well as his urban community service, Plaintiff has demonstrated that he is likely to establish that he is recognizable in the African-American community ' the same social segment at which Black Pearl has targeted Legit Baller.' The court further noted, however, that 'all arguments proffered by Plaintiff stress that he and his work and accomplishments are completely separate from, and unrelated to, the themes and content of the Book.' But the court decided: 'This Court finds that Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits of his Lanham Act claim; Plaintiff has established that he will likely prove that he owns a valid, protectable trademark in his likeness, and that Defendants' use of his likeness is likely to cause confusion as to whether he has endorsed or otherwise supported Legit Baller.'

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.