WebHaelan Laboratories, Inc. v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc. 11 . that a celebrity has a right to damages and other relief for the unautho-rized commercial appropriation of the celebrity's persona and that such a right is independent of a common-law or statutory right of. extent of damages sustained, in practice the debate is academic. WebApr 11, 2024 · I will first consider the case often wrongly credited with creating the right of publicity―Haelan Laboratories v. Topps Chewing Gum―and then reveal the right of …
Haelan Laboratories v. Topps Chewing Gum, No. 158 - vLex
WebThe first court decision to use the term right of publicity was Haelan Laboratories, Inc. v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc. (2d Cir. 1953). Professor Melville B. Nimmer promoted the concept the following year in a seminal article. Supreme Court has upheld right of publicity. The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the claim in Zacchini v. WebIn the landmark 1953 case of Haelan Laboratories v. Topps Chewing Gum, Judge Jerome Frank first articulated the modern right of publicity—a transferable intellectual property right. The right has since been seen to protect the commercial value of one’s “persona”—the Latin-derived word meaning the mask of an actor. nefsh phone number
Baseball Cards and the Birth of the Right of Publicity: The …
WebJan 2, 2024 · Abstract. In the landmark 1953 case of Haelan Laboratories v. Topps Chewing Gum, Judge Jerome Frank first articulated the modern right of publicity—a … WebHaelan Laboratories, Inc v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc. (1953) Case: Topps printed cards of a baseball player who had an exclusive contract with Haelan. Final Ruling: Established precedent for the “right of publicity”: the baseball player owned the “value of his photograph, i.e., the right to grant the exclusive privilege of publishing his picture.” WebHaelan Laboratories v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc4 is the first case which recognized that celebrity’s name or likeness has a value beyond the right of privacy. This case held that people, especially prominent ones, in addition to and independent of their right of privacy, have a ‘right in publicity value of their photographs’. nef softball