3. (§6.22) Infringement of the Right of Publicity
As stated in §6.21 above, the right of publicity is more of a property right than a privacy right, and it recognizes the individual’s right to regulate and obtain the benefits from the commercial exploitation of the individual’s:
· name, Cepeda v. Swift & Co., 415 F.2d 1205 (8 th Cir. 1969) (the use of Orlando Cepeda’s signature on baseballs, baseball gloves, and baseball bats);
· likeness, Ali v. Playgirl, Inc., 447 F. Supp. 723 (S.D.N.Y. 1978) (a nude picture of a model with features similar to heavyweight boxing champion Muhammad Ali); Memphis Dev. Found. v. Factors Etc., Inc., 616 F.2d 956 (6 th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 953 (1980) (the use of the likeness of deceased entertainer Elvis Presley);
· identifying characteristics, Carson v. Here’s Johnny Portable Toilets, Inc., 698 F.2d 831 (6 th Cir. 1983) (identifying characteristics of Johnny Carson, "Here’s Johnny" to refer to portable toilet facilities); Ali, 447 F. Supp. 723 (the use of the term "the Greatest," an identifying characteristic of Muhammad Ali); and
· actual performances, Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broad. Co., 433 U.S. 562 (1977) ("human cannonball" act).
Even subtle appropriations of aspects of a celebrity’s identity to falsely suggest a relationship between a person and a product or service may constitute a violation of the plaintiff’s right of publicity. See, e.g.:
...· White v. Samsung Elecs. Am., Inc., 989 F.2d 1512 (9 th
