Case Analysis : Ms. Celebrity

2025 Words9 Pages
Another analogy can be made in regards to the Allen case to Fallback’s possible litigation. In the possible Fallback litigation, Ms. Celebrity, a prominent celebrity, brought an action against a business for misappropriating her likeness in an advertisement, just as in the Allen case. The picture or portrait of Ms. Celebrity in this case is a robot, as opposed to a lookalike in the Allen case. In accordance to the Allen case the viewers of the advertisement must think that the person actually appeared in the advertisement. In the Allen case this question was left up to a jury, however, in the Fallback case it can be inferred that no person would believe that the robot in the advertisement was Ms. Celebrity herself. The fact that the…show more content…
In the Fallback litigation, Ms. Celebrity is upset because everyone is teasing her about the advertisement just as in McNulty where the plaintiff tries to bring his claim due to unwanted annoyance and banter. The court deems this cause of action not applicable though, therefore Ms. Celebrity’s claim would not proceed based on the annoyance and teasing she endured as a result of the advertisement. Ms. Celebrity may argue that her claim should survive because, unlike The Naked Cowboy, the persona she plays on television and her is one in the same. This claim can be easily refuted though by a few major points. The first point is that television is most often scripted. Ms. Celebrity, even if she does play herself on a reality television show, more than likely does not portray herself as she normally would all of the time. Another point to be made is that Ms. Celebrity is doing her job when she is on television. The Ms. Celebrity on television is a persona that she plays, and is paid to play. In order to keep her job Ms. Celebrity has to act a certain way to attract and retain viewers. To insinuate that she always acts the same way off camera as she does on camera is not plausible. The element of the statute requiring that the plaintiff’s likeness be used without her consent will not be satisfied in this case. This is because no viewer could mistake the robot used as Ms. Celebrity, Ms. Celebrity’s persona was
Open Document