The White v. Samsung Electronics case brief examines the right of publicity and protection of celebrity identity in commercial contexts. This landmark Ninth Circuit case involving game show host Vanna White established important precedents for how the law protects celebrities from unauthorized commercial appropriation of their identity, even when their name or likeness is not directly used.
White v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 971 F.2d 1395 (9th Cir. 1992)
Samsung Electronics created an advertisement featuring a robot dressed in a gown, wig, and jewelry, standing next to a game show board similar to that used on "Wheel of Fortune." The robot was posed in a manner reminiscent of Vanna White's characteristic pose on the show, with one hand on her hip and the other touching letters on the board. The ad included the caption "Longest-running game show. 2005 A.D." and was intended to convey that Samsung's products would still be in use in the future. Samsung did not obtain White's permission to use her identity or likeness in the advertisement.
Does the right of publicity protect a celebrity's identity from commercial appropriation even when the celebrity's name, likeness, or voice is not directly used, but the celebrity is nonetheless readily identifiable from the context and setting?
The right of publicity protects against the commercial appropriation of a celebrity's identity, which extends beyond just name and likeness to include other identifying characteristics that make the celebrity readily identifiable. The right of publicity is violated when a defendant appropriates the plaintiff's identity for commercial purposes without consent, even if done through indirect means such as distinctive settings, poses, or contexts associated with the celebrity.
The Ninth Circuit held that Samsung's advertisement violated White's right of publicity. The court found that even though Samsung did not use White's name or exact likeness, the robot advertisement appropriated White's identity by depicting a figure in a setting and pose that made White readily identifiable to viewers familiar with "Wheel of Fortune."
The court reasoned that the right of publicity should not be limited to cases involving direct use of name or likeness, as this would allow advertisers to evade liability through creative substitutions while still capitalizing on a celebrity's fame and identity. The court noted that the advertisement clearly evoked White's identity through the combination of the game show setting, the robot's pose and attire, and the futuristic theme that played on White's association with the long-running show. The court emphasized that the purpose of the right of publicity is to prevent others from commercially exploiting a celebrity's fame and identity without permission, regardless of the specific method used to evoke that identity.
White v. Samsung Electronics significantly expanded the scope of the right of publicity beyond traditional name and likeness protections. The case established that celebrities can protect their identity from commercial appropriation even when advertisers use creative substitutions or indirect references. This decision has been influential in intellectual property and entertainment law, though it has also been criticized for potentially chilling creative expression and parody.
This case is crucial for understanding the right of publicity and how it protects celebrity identity beyond just name and likeness. It demonstrates the evolution of intellectual property law to address modern advertising techniques and the commercial value of celebrity identity.
The case established that the right of publicity protects against commercial appropriation of celebrity identity through any means that makes the celebrity readily identifiable, not just direct use of name or likeness.
Professors use this case to teach the right of publicity, celebrity rights, and the balance between protecting celebrity identity and preserving creative expression. It's often used to discuss the expansion of intellectual property rights and their limits.
White v. Samsung Electronics stands as a landmark case in the right of publicity, expanding protection of celebrity identity beyond traditional name and likeness to encompass any commercial appropriation that makes a celebrity readily identifiable. The case reflects the law's adaptation to modern advertising techniques while raising important questions about the balance between celebrity rights and creative expression.