Showing posts with label Social Media Legal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Media Legal. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Social Media and The Right To Publicity

The Right To Publicity enables a person to profit off of his or her name or likeness. This right varies from state to state and may be extremely valuable for entertainers and professional athletes who have a marketable name or likeness. This right was first recognized by the U.S. Courts in 1953 in Halean v. Topps 202 F.2d 866. Here, a baseball card company sued a competitor alleging that it owned an exclusive right to photograph and to publicize ballplayers they had under contract and that a competitor did not have the right to utilize a player's likeness in their trading card set while the player was still under contract with the plaintiff.

The Halean Court stated, "that, in addition to and independent of that right of privacy, a man has a right in the publicity value of his photograph, i. e., the right to grant the exclusive privilege of publishing his picture, and that such a grant may validly be made 'in gross,' i. e., without an accompanying transfer of a business or of anything else. Whether it be labelled a 'property' right is immaterial; for here, as often elsewhere, the tag 'property' simply symbolizes the fact that courts enforce a claim which has pecuniary worth. This right might be called a 'right of publicity.' For it is common knowledge that many prominent persons (especially actors and ball-players), far from having their feelings bruised through public exposure of their likenesses, would feel sorely deprived if they no longer received money for authorizing advertisements, popularizing their countenances, displayed in newspapers, magazines, busses, trains and subways. This right of publicity would usually yield them no money unless it could be made the subject of an exclusive grant which barred any other advertiser from using their pictures."

Entertainers, professional athletes, and celebutantes (those famous for being famous) have a love-hate relationship with the paparazzi. The paparazzi serve a much needed role because they help these people stay in the public's eye. According to the L.A. Times, some celebrities may have formal or informal relationships with members of the paparazzi which feed the publicity machine that is so important to an entertainer's career. Celebrities sell the rights to their images for staggering sums. For example, according to the Today Show, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie sold photos of their newborn twins to People and Hello magazines for $14 million dollars. Pitt and Jolie had previously sold images of their daughter Shiloh to Getty Images for a donation and to People and Hello Magazine for $4 million dollars.

The bottom line is that social media may create new revenue opportunities that if properly utilized has the potential to become major income streams. Unfortunately, for most entertainers and professional athletes the window of opportunity to capitalize on these assets is short and unpredictable. Therefore, social media action plans must be created and implemented during the early stages of a celebrity's or athlete's career. To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

Sunday, February 28, 2010

Litigation Facebook Friending

Litigation Facebook Friending is going to become a major litigation due diligence issue in the coming years. In my January 8, 2010 post I created a legal definition for a Facebook Friend. In that post I defined a Facebook Friend as:

"someone whom is added to your network on a social media website. A "Facebook Friend" may or may not be someone with whom you have ever met or interacted with other than requesting that he or she be added to your network or that you confirmed that he or she be added to your network."

Neither Black's Law Dictionary nor Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary has a definition for Litigation Facebook Friending. Therefore, I would like to create a legal definition for this activity. Litigation Facebook Friending occurs when a plaintiff or a defendant in litigation "encourages" a non-party to "Facebook Friend" one of the other litigants or a member(s) of the jury so an opposing litigant(s) can obtain inside information on another litigant(s) or a member of the jury.

If you know what your opposing litigant(s) and/or members of the jury are doing or thinking and they don't know that you have access to their Facebook or other social media website posts this can be a huge advantage. Does anyone remember John Grisham's novel and subsequent movie Runaway Jury?

In March 2009, the Philadelphia Bar Association Professional Guidance Committee provided an advisory opinion that stated that Facebook Friending opposing litigants may be considered misconduct. The opinion was not binding upon the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania or any other Court. I believe there will be many contradictory opinions across the country on this matter and that the American Bar Association will ultimately need to resolve this issue. To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.