The Right of Publicity Versus Free Speech in Advertising: Some Counter-Points to Professor McCarthy
Vol: 18, Issue: 3, Page: 593
1996
- 589Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage589
- Downloads500
- Abstract Views89
Expert Opinion Description
Professor J. Thomas McCarthy, in a recently published lecture, has defended recent expansions of the right of publicity and rejected the idea of a free-speech defense that would in some cases protect the unlicensed use of a celebrity's name, likeness, or "identity" in an advertisement. In this "counter-lecture" Professor Barnett focuses on what he sees as the growing conflict between the right of publicity, as embodied in Ninth Circuit decisions such as the Vanna White and Abdul-Jabbar cases and in the Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition, and free speech in advertising, as protected by the Supreme Court's doctrine of "commercial speech." Professor Barnett argues that the right of publicity in its recent expansions may violate First Amendment prohibitions against vagueness and undue breadth, and that the Supreme Court's test for restrictions on commercial speech should lead to recognition of a "fair use" defense to right-of-publicity claims. The author concludes by considering two possible applications of such a defense-to an ad using sports statistics, as in Abdul-Jabbar, and to one that is a parody or spoof of popular culture, as in White.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know