Reflection on the Relationship between Copyright and Publicity Right: Interaction or Contradiction?!

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Assistant Professor in the Department of Law, Faculty of Humanities, Jahrom University, Jahrom, Iran,

Abstract

Abstract
This article investigates the relationship between copyright and publicity right. These rights are connected in a place where the creators of literary and artistic works use the identity symbols of celebrities and especially their images to create their works. Here, the conflict between the two owners of moral rights shows itself. According to the fundamental principles of copyright or author's right, the work belongs to its creator. On the other hand, using a person's image without his consent can be considered an infringement of publicity right because of free riding and exploitation. Therefore, according to the standards raised in pioneering countries such as America, the right to publicity is recognized as an inherent right of a human being to prevent profiteering from identity signs and emphasize the right's economic aspect. The legal doctrines do not agree on the clash between these two rights and whether the reputation owner should be defended and prevented from violating his economic rights or take the side of the copyright holder. This has led to conflicting opinions and also verdicts in American law. Therefore, the primary question of this research is: In cases of interference between copyright and publicity right, who owns the exclusive rights and benefits of the creativity that have appeared?
The current research aims to answer the above question with a descriptive-analytical method and a library and comparative approach. For this purpose, an attempt has been made to clarify the concept of copyright and publicity right, the relationship between the two in terms of similarities and differences, and the interference of these two rights. Solving the conflict between this issue from different legal and judicial perspectives is another subject matter that is considered along with Iran's legal position. The fundamental belief is that if the owner of the publicity right exercises his rights and prevents the manifestation of his identity marks in the literary and artistic works of others, huge damages will be caused to the copyright holders, and consequently, the general public will suffer; This partiality means the opportunity loss to create new and derivative works based on adaptation for other artists and blocks the way of innovation in the future.  If the rights of the copyright holder are overridden, the right of the person to benefit from the features of reputation and identity will be infringed. Therefore, in case of interference, a frontier should be found between these two conflicting interests and the rights of copyright creators and owners of publicity right must be considered. In American law, referring to the principle of "fair use" and expanding its dimensions to the publicity right is considered an important step in settling the claims of copyright owners and the right of publicity. In this regard, the four criteria of the nature of use, the nature of publicity right, Substantiality of the Misappropriation, and the effect of the use on the potential market the owner of publicity have been considered in explaining the boundary between commercial and non-commercial use. The article concludes that the dominance of these two different legal bodies does not mean that one has precedence over the other or that each one is nullified by the other. One should respect the author's creative activities and consider protecting the exclusive rights hidden in identity symbols and controlling their use. Therefore, one of the research achievements is that there is coexistence between two rights, and emphasizing each one does not mean excluding the other or reducing each territory against the other. In Iranian law, although the right to publicity has not been taken into consideration by the legislator and the judicial procedure is silent in any case, it is possible to achieve this conclusion with the inspiration of the solution adopted in leading countries and along with global developments, in the assumption that a creator exploits the celebrity's symbols in his work, the judge must make a decision and they can distinguish between commercial and non-commercial exploitation by referring to the principles of fair use and especially the criterion of the nature and context of use, and if they find free riding, consider the famous person entitled to receive compensation. In this way, the creation of a literary and artistic work from the image of a famous person without his consent is allowed if it is either taken in public places and according to the rights of citizenship, based on the right to freedom of expression and access to information, or the creator manifests the celebrity's image in a transformative way based on the derivative work, so that the famous person is regarded the secondary subject of that work.
 

Keywords

References

  1. منابع

    الف) فارسی

    1. بنسبردی، معصومه؛ سیدمحمدمهدی قبولی درافشان و سعید محسنی (1398). «مطالعة تطبیقی راه‌های حقوقی حمایت از ارزش تبلیغاتی نشان‌های هویتی اشخاص مشهور در ایالات متحده امریکا و ایران». فصلنامة حقوق خصوصی، دورة 16، ش 2، ص 273-299، https://jolt.ut.ac.ir/article_74136.html (4 بهمن‌ماه 1402).

    2. شاکری، زهرا (1394). «استفادة منصفانه از آثار ادبی و هنری؛ حقی برای جامعه؟!». فصلنامة مطالعات حقوق خصوصی، دورة 35، ش 2 پیاپی، ص 207-223، https://jlq.ut.ac.ir/article_54445.html (4 بهمن‌ماه 1402).

    3. شاکری، زهرا (1395). «معیارهای بهینه‌سازی مقررات محدودیت‌ها و استثنائات در نظام حقوق مالکیت ادبی و هنری. فصلنامة حقوق پزشکی (ویژه‌نامة حقوق مالکیت فکری)، ج 10، ص 119-148، https://ijmedicallaw.ir/article-1-643-fa.html (24 تیرماه 1402).

    4. شبیری زنجانی، سیدحسن (1396). «مطالعة تطبیقی نقیضه‌گویی در آثار ادبی و هنری؛ هدف کپی‌رایت یا نقض کپی‌رایت!». فصلنامة الهیات هنر، ش 10، ص 43-104، https://elahiyatehonar.isoa.ir/article_35703.html (4 بهمن‌ماه 1402).

    5. صالحی مازندارنی، محمد و عمید محمدی، (1400). «حمایت حقوقی از شخصیت‌های خیالی (کاراکترها) در آمریکا؛ رهاوردی برای حقوق ایران»، فصلنامة حقوق تطبیقی دانشگاه تهران، دورة 12، ش 1، ص 191-218، https://jcl.ut.ac.ir/article_82754.html (30 خردادماه 1402).

    6. قبولی درافشان، محمدهادی؛ مصطفی بختیاروند و سمانه خوانساری (1397). «حق شهرت مطالعه در حقوق آمریکا، کوشش برای شناسایی در فقه امامیه و ساماندهی آن در حقوق ایران». فصلنامة مطالعات حقوق خصوصی، دورة 48، ش 1، ص 133-151، https://jlq.ut.ac.ir/article_65414.html (28 خردادماه 1402).

    7. محمدی، عمید (1400). نظریة عمومی حق بر شهرت: حمایت از حق شهرت در نظام‌های حقوقی کامن‌لا، رومی-ژرمنی و ایران. رسالة دکتری رشتة حقوق خصوصی، دانشکدة حقوق، دانشگاه قم.

    8. محمدی، عمید؛ محمد صالحی مازندرانی و مهدی زاهدی (1396). «حمایت از حق شهرت در پرتو حقوق مالکیت فکری با رویکرد تطبیقی». فصلنامة پژوهش‌های حقوق تطبیقی، دورة 20، ش3، ص 214-185، https://clr.modares.ac.ir/article-20-11641-fa.html (27 خردادماه 1402).

    9. میرشکاری، عباس (1397). «استثناهای حق تصویر». فصلنامة مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی، دورة 9، شماره 1، ص 451-472، https://jcl.ut.ac.ir/article_67277.html (5 بهمن‌ماه 1402).

    10. میرشکاری، عباس (1399). «تزاحم حق اشخاص مشهور با آزادی بیان در نظام‌های حقوقی، آمریکا، فرانسه، آلمان و ایران». مجلة حقوقی دادگستری، سال 84، ش 110، ص 213-240، https://www.jlj.ir/article_40309.html (15 تیرماه 1402).

    11. میرشمسی، محمدهادی و حسام جلائیان دهقانی (1396). «گسترة کپی‌رایت نسبت به اطلاعات دولتی». فصلنامة پژوهش حقوق عمومی، سال 19، ش 55، ص 109-140، https://qjpl.atu.ac.ir/article_7785.html (18 آذرماه 1402).

    ب) خارجی

    1. Apfelbaum, Marc J. (1983). “Copyright and the Right of Publicity: One Pea in Two Pods”. Georgetown Law Journal, Vol.71, No.6, pp. 1576-1594, heinonline, (Accessed 21 Octobre 2022).
    2. Bressler, Kenneth L. (1983). “The right of publicity, section 43(a) of the Lanham act and copyright preemption: Preventing the unauthorized commercial exploitation of uncopyrighted works of art”. Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, Vol.2, pp. 265-286. (Accessed 12 September 2022).
    3. Bartholomew, Mark (2001). “Protecting the Performers: Setting a New Standard for Character Copyrightability”. Santa Clara L. Rev., Vol.41, pp. 341-379. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1673264 (Accessed 6 June 2022).
    4. Blanke, Jordan. M. (2013). “No doubt about it - you've got to have heart: Simulation video games may redefine the balance between and among the right of publicity, the first amendment, and copyright law”. B.U. J. Sci. & Tech. L., Vol.19. pp. 1-43, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2826694 (Accessed 17 March 2021).
    5. Buchsbaum, William, (2018). “Harmonizing the Tension Between the First Amendment and Publicity Right and Finding the Right Balance: Discerning How Much Freedom is Warranted and What Needs Protection”. U. Cin. Intell. Prop. & Computer L.J., Vol.3, Issue.1, pp. 1-25, https://scholarship.law.uc.edu/ipclj/vol3/iss1/2/ (Accessed 30 March 2022).
    6. Cotter, Thomas F., & Dmitrieva, Irina Y. (2010). “Integrating the Right of Publicity with First Amendment and Copyright Preemption Analysis”. Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts, Vol.33, No.2, pp. 165-225, https://ssrn.com/abstract=1479839 (Accessed 30 June 2021).
    7. Coyne, Randall T.E. (1988). “Toward a Modified Fair Use Defense in Right of Publicity Cases”. Wm. & Mary L. Rev., Vol.29, Issue.4, pp. 781-821, https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol29/iss4/4 (Accessed 6 September 2022).
    8. DiGregorio, Christine (2017). “Finding a Fair Balance for the Right of Publicity and First Amendment Protections”. Touro Law Review, Vol.33, No.3, Article 14. pp. 995-1042, https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview/vol33/iss3/14 (Accessed 6 September 2022).
    9. Dawson, Dawn H. (2001). “THE Final Frontier: Right of Publicity in Fictional Characters”. University of Illionois Law Review, Vol.7, No.2. pp. 635-668, https://www.illinoislawreview.org (Accessed 13 September 2022).
    10. Dogan, Stacey L. & Lemley Mark A., (2006). “What the Right of Publicity Can Learn from Trademark Law”. Stanford Law Review, Vol.58, pp. 1161-1220, https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/420 (Accessed 13 March 2022).
    11. Fine, Lawrence (1988). “Right of Publicity and Copyright Preemption after Baltimore Orioles”. Rutgers Law Review, Vol.40, No.3, pp. 971-998, heinonline, (Accessed 6 June 2022).
    12. Fowler, Stephen R. (2008). “Taking a Bite Out of Michael Vick's Publicity Right: An Analysis of How the Right of Publicity Should be Treated After a Celebrity is Convicted of a Crime”. J. Intell. Prop. L., Vol.16, Issue.1, pp. 109-136, https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/jipl/vol16/iss1/6 (Accessed 19 June 2022).
    13. Ham, Tina (2003). “The Right of Publicity: Finding a Balance in the Fair Use Doctrine – Hoffman v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc.”. U.C. DAVIS L. REV., Vol.36. pp. 543- 572, heinonline, (Accessed 22 Aprill 2022).
    14. Koehler, Jennifer L. (2001). “Comedy III Productions, Inc. v. Gary Saderup, Inc.: Finding a Balance between the Right of Publicity and the First Amendment Right of Freedom of Speech”. Santa Clara High Tech. L.J., Vol.18, Issue.1, pp. 161-170, https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj/vol18/iss1/6/ (Accessed 20 Aprill 2022).
    15. Koo, Andrew (2006). “Right of Publicity: The Right of Publicity Fair Use Doctrine - Adopting a Better Standard”. Buff. Intell. Prop. L.J., Vol.4, Issue.1, pp. 1-25, https://scholarship.law.uc.edu/ipclj/vol3/iss1/2 (Accessed 17 June 2021).
    16. Marlan, Dustin (2020). “Unmasking the Right of Publicity”. Hastings L. J., Vol.71, Issue 2, pp. 419-474, https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal/vol71/iss2/5, (Accessed 17 June 2021).
    17. Masur, Richard (2000). “Right of Publicity from the Performer's Point of View”, DePaul J. Art, Tech. & Intell. Prop. L., Vol.10, pp. 419-447, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3300959 (Accessed 30 March 2022).
    18. Peles,Gil (2004). “The Right of Publicity Gone Wild”. UCLA Entertainment Law Review, Vol.11, Iss.2, pp. 303-329, https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1dw5v8k0, (Accessed 21 Octobre 2022).
    19. Redish, Martin H. & Kelsey B.Shust, (2015). “The Right of Publicity and the First Amendment in the Modern Age of Commercial Speech”. William & Mary Law Review, Vol.56, pp. 1443-1500,https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=3589&context=wmlr (Accessed 6 June 2022).
    20. Rothman, Jennifer E. (2002). “Copyright Preemption and the Right of Publicity”. U.C. DAVIS L. REv., Vol. 36, pp. 199-265, heinonline, (Accessed 13 March 2022).
    21. Rothman, Jennifer E.(2016). “The Other Side of Garcia: The Right of Publicity and Copyright Preemption”. COLUM. J.L. & ARTS, Vol.39, 441-448, https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=3589&context=wmlr (Accessed 13 March 2022).
    22. Weisbord,Reid Kress (2016). “A Copyright Right of Publicity”, Fordham L. Rev., Vol.84, Issue.6, pp. 2803-2844, http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol84/iss6/16, (Accessed 6 June 2022).
    23. Yu, Peter K. (1998). “Fictional Persona Test: Copyright Preemption in Human Audiovisual Characters”. Cardozo L. Rev., Vol.20, pp. 355-414, https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/facscholar/505 (Accessed 20 Aprill 2022).
Law Quarterly
Volume 53, Issue 4
March 2024
Pages 603-624

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics