This is very simple. “The athletes claim the app violates a section of the California Civil Code which makes it unlawful to use without consent another’s name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness for commercial purposes.” California needs to get this out of the code immediately. Though the “right” claimed to be protected by this law is imaginary, the chilling effect and potential liablity is very real.
The “right of publicity” should carry the same weight as the “right to not be offended” — namely NONE WHATSOEVER!
did these athletes give the USOC the authority to do this when they signed some release in the past? maybe. maybe not. I suspect it will come down to what rights they gave up to the USOC.
This is very simple. “The athletes claim the app violates a section of the California Civil Code which makes it unlawful to use without consent another’s name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness for commercial purposes.” California needs to get this out of the code immediately. Though the “right” claimed to be protected by this law is imaginary, the chilling effect and potential liablity is very real.
The “right of publicity” should carry the same weight as the “right to not be offended” — namely NONE WHATSOEVER!
did these athletes give the USOC the authority to do this when they signed some release in the past? maybe. maybe not. I suspect it will come down to what rights they gave up to the USOC.