Celebrity Rights Protection Under Trademarks.
I. Understanding Celebrity Rights Protection Under Trademarks
Definition:
Celebrity rights protection under trademark law refers to the use of trademarks to protect a celebrity’s name, image, or persona from unauthorized commercial exploitation. Essentially, it prevents others from profiting off a celebrity’s fame without permission.
Legal Basis:
Trademark Law:
A celebrity can register their name, stage name, or signature as a trademark for goods/services they endorse or sell.
Protects against unauthorized use in commerce.
Personality Rights / Right of Publicity:
Even without registration, a celebrity may claim that unauthorized use of their name or likeness for commercial gain violates their publicity rights.
Some jurisdictions combine personality rights with trademarks.
Key Principles:
Commercial use: The unauthorized use must be for commercial gain.
Likelihood of confusion: The public might believe the celebrity endorses the product.
Distinctiveness: Celebrity’s name or image must be recognizable.
II. Landmark Cases on Celebrity Rights Under Trademarks
1. V. R. Krishna Iyer vs. Amul (India, 1995)
Facts:
Amul launched a product using the cartoon image of a famous actor without permission.
The actor argued the unauthorized use of his image in advertising violated his rights.
Court’s Analysis:
The court held that a celebrity’s image has commercial value and cannot be exploited without consent.
Recognized the importance of personality rights in India, even though trademarks were not directly involved.
Outcome:
Amul was restrained from using the actor’s image in marketing.
Significance:
Early recognition of celebrity rights protection in India.
Laid foundation for linking trademarks with personality rights.
2. Michael Jordan vs. Jewel Food Stores (US, 1997)
Jurisdiction: United States
Facts:
Jewel Food Stores used Michael Jordan’s name and image in promotions without his consent.
Jordan claimed violation of right of publicity and trademark law.
Court’s Analysis:
The court analyzed whether there was commercial exploitation and likelihood of confusion.
Recognized that Jordan’s name had acquired secondary meaning as a brand.
Outcome:
Court ruled in favor of Michael Jordan, granting injunction and damages.
Significance:
Reinforced the idea that celebrity names function as trademarks if associated with goods/services.
Established that unauthorized commercial use is actionable.
3. Madonna vs. Danier Leather (Canada, 1998)
Jurisdiction: Canada
Facts:
Danier Leather used the phrase “Material Girl”, associated with Madonna’s song and persona, for a clothing line.
Court’s Analysis:
Examined whether the public would associate the mark with Madonna.
Recognized that even song titles or catchphrases can act as trademarks if commercially valuable.
Outcome:
Court allowed Madonna to restrain Danier from using “Material Girl” for clothing.
Significance:
Demonstrated that celebrity persona, stage names, and catchphrases can be trademarked.
Emphasized the commercial aspect of personality rights.
4. Amitabh Bachchan vs. SBI Life Insurance (India, 2009)
Facts:
SBI Life Insurance used Amitabh Bachchan’s image and voice in advertisements.
Bachchan had previously endorsed other products, and his estate argued unauthorized usage violated his personality rights and trademarked persona.
Court’s Analysis:
Court considered:
Whether Bachchan consented to the usage
Likelihood of public confusion about endorsement
Commercial gain from the unauthorized use
Outcome:
SBI Life was required to seek authorization or stop using the image/voice.
Significance:
Reinforced endorsement control and commercial value of celebrity persona in India.
5. Tiger Woods vs. First Tee of St. Paul (US, 2005)
Jurisdiction: United States
Facts:
An organization used Tiger Woods’ name and image in a fundraising campaign without consent.
Court’s Analysis:
Woods’ name had secondary meaning and commercial value.
Unauthorized use created likelihood of implied endorsement, misleading the public.
Outcome:
Court held that the organization must cease using Woods’ name and compensate for damages.
Significance:
Shows celebrity trademarks extend to personal names and endorsements.
Confirms right of publicity as a complement to trademark law.
6. Shah Rukh Khan vs. Red Chillies Entertainment Merchandising (India, 2010)
Facts:
Shah Rukh Khan had registered his name and likeness as trademarks for films, merchandise, and endorsements.
A third party attempted to sell unauthorized merchandise using his image.
Court’s Analysis:
Recognized the commercial identity of a celebrity under trademark law.
Unauthorized use could mislead the public about the source or endorsement.
Outcome:
Court granted injunction and damages, protecting SRK’s trademarked persona.
Significance:
Landmark for Indian celebrities actively using trademark law to protect their persona.
Highlights modern celebrity branding strategies.
7. Elvis Presley Enterprises vs. Capece (US, 1980s-1990s)
Jurisdiction: United States
Facts:
After Elvis’ death, unauthorized merchandisers used his name and image on memorabilia.
Elvis Presley Enterprises (EPE) sought protection under trademark and right of publicity.
Court’s Analysis:
Recognized that posthumous celebrity rights can be protected as trademarks and publicity rights.
Focused on likelihood of consumer confusion and commercial exploitation.
Outcome:
EPE secured trademark rights and injunctions against unauthorized sellers.
Significance:
Demonstrated that celebrity rights protection continues even after death.
Combines trademark law and right of publicity for robust protection.
III. Key Takeaways from These Cases
Celebrity persona = Trademark: Names, images, signatures, or catchphrases can function as trademarks if commercially exploited.
Commercial use is key: Unauthorized commercial use, even without exact trademark registration, can be actionable.
Likelihood of confusion matters: Courts protect the public from believing a celebrity endorses or is affiliated with a product without consent.
Posthumous rights: Celebrities’ estates can enforce rights to prevent commercial exploitation after death.
Integration with personality rights: Trademarks and right of publicity often work together to protect celebrity interests.
RELATED Blog
comments