[Rumori] rosa parks suing Outkast

[kembrew mcleod]

Quoting Samuel Carey <discosammy at yahoo.com>:

> maybe i'm a complete and utter moron here, but how the hell can you stop
> people from writing songs about you?

much of her case rests on a lesser known kind of IP law, right of publicity. 
because it's so ambiguous, it's a quite draconian law. here's something i've 
written about the law, to give some background, if anyone cares:

When promoting her line of perfumes, Elizabeth Taylor flatly acknowledged, “I 
am my own commodity.”  It’s a telling statement, one that highlights the extent 
to which people are willing to think of themselves as commodified beings. Tony 
Hawk, for instance, is far more valuable as an abstract brand than a corporeal 
being, which isn’t to say that this abstract entity’s value won’t decline as 
his body does. The legal doctrine that protects celebrity images, called “right 
of publicity,” is relatively recent, emerging in the mid-20th century (unlike 
copyright, which developed in the 18th century).  It helped create a new kind 
of private property, adding to the growing list of things that have been nailed 
down with a price tag.   

Over the years, the right of publicity has been expanded to include distinctive 
traits, characteristics, mannerisms or paraphernalia.  Rosemary Coombe writes, 
“It is no longer limited to the name or likeness of the individual, but now 
extends to a person’s nickname, signature, physical pose, characterizations, 
singing style, vocal characteristics, body parts, frequently used phrases, car, 
performance style, and mannerisms and gestures, provided that these are 
distinctive and publicly identified with the person claiming the right.”  

In the Vanna White v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. case, the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit enlarged publicity protection. In that case, a 
Samsung commercial featured a robot wearing a blonde wig, jewelry, and an 
evening gown that stood in front of a display board. It was meant to resemble 
the set of the game show, Wheel of Fortune, which featured Ms. White as a piece 
of eye candy who turned vowels and consonants on the board. The court ruled 
that the commercial infringed on White’s right of publicity, even though no 
reasonable person would mistake the blonde robot for the real Vanna White, or 
think she had authorized the commercial.  

“Right of publicity” has also been stretched to protect a singer’s voice from 
imitation. Courts had previously rejected the idea that a singer’s vocal style 
could be protected under right of publicity, but today there are two 
significant precedents that have expanded that right.  In 1988, pop star Bette 
Midler sued the Ford Motor company and its advertising agency for deliberately 
imitating one of her songs in a television commercial.  They argued that it 
wasn’t simply a case of imitation, but of trespassing on the property that is 
her famous voice (and, by extension, her valuable personality). In Midler v. 
Ford Motor Co., the California court held that “Midler had a legitimate claim 
under the common law right of publicity.”  

After the Midler decision, the professional weirdo/singer-songwriter Tom Waits 
successfully sued Frito-Lay for using a singer who imitated his raspy style for 
a radio commercial. The Ninth Circuit drew upon the Midler decision, awarding 
Waits and his lawyers $2 million in punitive damages. Legal scholar Russell 
Stamets points out that this decision “represents a dramatic expansion of the 
publicity right defined in Midler. In the Midler case, Ford’s advertising 
agency admitted trying to imitate Midler in a version of a song she made a 
hit.” He continues, “Unlike Ford, however, Frito-Lay’s sound-alike was given an 
original tune to sing, a tune never associated with the plaintiff.”  


*******************
kembrew mcleod
1218 college st.
iowa city, ia 52245
kembrew-mcleod at uiowa.edu
319-341-3583