<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Invasion of Privacy or Public Figure?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thewhole9.com/blogs/thelegalroad/2010/01/22/invasion-of-privacy-or-public-figure/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thewhole9.com/blogs/thelegalroad/2010/01/22/invasion-of-privacy-or-public-figure/</link>
	<description>A law blog by Robert Lombardo on The Whole 9</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed,  8 Jun 2011 18:35:10 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: biko</title>
		<link>http://thewhole9.com/blogs/thelegalroad/2010/01/22/invasion-of-privacy-or-public-figure/comment-page-1/#comment-151</link>
		<dc:creator>biko</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2010 14:14:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewhole9.com/blogs/thelegalroad/?p=39#comment-151</guid>
		<description>*********
Prince Chuck prevails against Posers Vineyard
in a tort action for invasion of privacy.
*********




Although Prince Chuck is a public figure and thus subject to news coverage, he has a property right in his name and likeness.  Therefore, when Posers Vineyards used Prince Chuck’s name and likeness without his consent for its commercial use, it violated that property right.  Posers Vineyards would have needed an exclusive license from Prince Chuck to use his name and likeness – which they didn’t have.

Prince Chuck does not have a claim against T’reek because he didn’t publish the photograph at all.  T’reek and Mykae’Y could have published it on their Facebook page because Prince Chuck is a public figure.  Again, it is the commercial use that is the issue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>*********<br />
Prince Chuck prevails against Posers Vineyard<br />
in a tort action for invasion of privacy.<br />
*********</p>
<p>Although Prince Chuck is a public figure and thus subject to news coverage, he has a property right in his name and likeness.  Therefore, when Posers Vineyards used Prince Chuck’s name and likeness without his consent for its commercial use, it violated that property right.  Posers Vineyards would have needed an exclusive license from Prince Chuck to use his name and likeness – which they didn’t have.</p>
<p>Prince Chuck does not have a claim against T’reek because he didn’t publish the photograph at all.  T’reek and Mykae’Y could have published it on their Facebook page because Prince Chuck is a public figure.  Again, it is the commercial use that is the issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: awaken2sun</title>
		<link>http://thewhole9.com/blogs/thelegalroad/2010/01/22/invasion-of-privacy-or-public-figure/comment-page-1/#comment-150</link>
		<dc:creator>awaken2sun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2010 00:34:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewhole9.com/blogs/thelegalroad/?p=39#comment-150</guid>
		<description>If Poser&#039;s Vineyard asked T’reek if he had a model/celebrity release and he said yes, them I believe that T&#039;reek would then be the one responsible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If Poser&#8217;s Vineyard asked T’reek if he had a model/celebrity release and he said yes, them I believe that T&#8217;reek would then be the one responsible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

