Ali v. Playgirl, Inc.
206 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 1021, 3 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2540, 447 F. Supp. 723 (1978)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The unauthorized use of a public figure's likeness for commercial purposes, when not in connection with a newsworthy item, violates both the statutory right to privacy under New York Civil Rights Law § 51 and the common law right of publicity.
Facts:
- Playgirl, Inc. published its February 1978 issue of Playgirl Magazine.
- The magazine contained a portrait depicting a nude black man seated in a corner of a boxing ring.
- The portrait's facial features were recognizably those of plaintiff Muhammad Ali, a world-famous boxer.
- An accompanying verse referred to the figure as "the Greatest," an appellation publicly and regularly associated with Ali.
- The magazine, including the portrait, was distributed in New York State by Independent News Company.
- Muhammad Ali did not provide written consent for the use of his likeness in the magazine.
- After the magazine's scheduled removal from U.S. newsstands, Playgirl, Inc. intended to distribute the same issue in England.
Procedural Posture:
- Muhammad Ali sued Playgirl, Inc., Independent News Company, and Tony Yamada in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, a federal trial court.
- Ali filed an order to show cause seeking a preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order (TRO).
- The district court issued a TRO on January 31, 1978.
- At a hearing, defendant Independent News Company stipulated that it would cease distribution and impound returned copies, leading plaintiff to withdraw his request for injunctive relief against it.
- Plaintiff renewed his motion for a preliminary injunction against defendant Playgirl, Inc., which intended to continue distribution in England.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the unauthorized publication of a recognizable, albeit fictionalized, nude portrait of a public figure for commercial purposes violate that person's statutory right of privacy and common law right of publicity under New York law?
Opinions:
Majority - Gagliardi, District Judge
Yes, the unauthorized publication of a recognizable, albeit fictionalized, nude portrait of a public figure for commercial purposes violates that person's statutory right of privacy and common law right of publicity under New York law. The drawing is a 'portrait or picture' under New York Civil Rights Law § 51 because its facial characteristics, the boxing context, and the accompanying verse referring to 'the Greatest' make it an unmistakable likeness of Muhammad Ali. The portrait's publication was for 'purposes of trade' as it was not newsworthy but was a fictional dramatization included solely to attract attention and increase sales. Ali’s status as a public figure does not forfeit his right to be free from commercial exploitation; the privilege of public comment does not extend to the commercialization of a personality. Furthermore, the publication violated Ali's common law right of publicity, which protects the proprietary interest a person has in the commercial value of their identity and prevents others from unjust enrichment through the 'theft of good will.' The potential damage to Ali's reputation and the difficulty in calculating monetary damages for the appropriation of his unique likeness constitute irreparable injury, justifying a preliminary injunction.
Analysis:
This case is a landmark decision that solidifies the distinction between the protected use of a public figure's likeness for newsworthy purposes and its unprotected commercial exploitation. It affirms that the common law right of publicity exists in New York as a proprietary right, separate from the statutory right of privacy, protecting the commercial value of one's persona. The court's willingness to grant an extraterritorial injunction, extending its reach to England, underscores the broad remedial powers of federal courts to protect such rights. This ruling has been highly influential in shaping modern intellectual property law concerning celebrity endorsements and likeness rights.
