Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Commemorative Ad Isn't Protected Free Speech

By Stan Soocher
February 28, 2014

Entertainment trade publications often compile special issues and sections that include tribute ads commemorating celebrated individuals and events. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit weighed in on the practice in the context of free speech regarding an ad in a special issue of the consumer imprint Sports Illustrated.

The special issue celebrated the 2009 induction of Michael Jordan into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame. Sports Illustrated offered free ad space to Jewel Food Stores in return for agreeing to distribute the Jordan special issue in its stores. In Jewel's commemorative ad, the chain store's logo and its slogan (“Good things are just around the corner”) appeared above a pair of basketball shoes labeled with Jordan's Chicago Bulls' number “23.” But Jordan sued, claiming the ad violated, among other things, his rights under the Illinois Right of Publicity Act and the federal Lanham Act. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, however, ruled that Jewel's ad was protected non-commercial speech under the First Amendment.

Reversing, the Seventh Circuit found “Jewel's ad has an unmistakable commercial function: enhancing the Jewel-Osco brand in the minds of consumers. This commercial message is implicit but easily inferred, and is the dominant one.” The appeals court observed of the commemorative ad's layout: “Jewel-Osco's graphic logo and slogan appear just below the textual salute to Jordan. The bold red logo is prominently featured in the center of the ad and in a font size larger than any other on the page. Both the logo and the slogan are styled in their trademarked ways. Their style, size, and color set them off from the congratulatory text, drawing attention to Jewel-Osco's sponsorship of the tribute. Apart from the basketball shoes, the Jewel-Osco brand-name is the center of visual attention on the page. And the congratulatory message specifically incorporates Jewel's slogan: 'as we honor a fellow Chicagoan who was “just around the corner” for so many years.' The ad is plainly aimed at fostering goodwill for the Jewel brand among the targeted consumer group ' 'fellow Chicagoans' and fans of Michael Jordan ' for the purpose of increasing patronage at Jewel-Osco stores.” Jordan v. Jewel Food Stores Inc., 12-1992.

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.