Legally Using Celebrity Images for Corporate Gain

In a word, no. Celebrities get very touchy about this kind of thing, because their image (likeness) is really all they have to sell. And you'd be using that image without their permission or compensation to the individuals involved.

The most recent example of how celebrities react to this sort of thing is the Jessica Alba/Playboy flap. Alba's upset with (and I think sueing) Playboy because she's featured on the current issue's cover. She says it implies that she's nude or semi-nude in the issue, which isn't the case.

In a word, no. Celebrities get very touchy about this kind of thing, because their image (likeness) is really all they have to sell. And you'd be using that image without their permission or compensation to the individuals involved.

The most recent example of how celebrities react to this sort of thing is the Jessica Alba/Playboy flap. Alba's upset with (and I think sueing) Playboy because she's featured on the current issue's cover. She says it implies that she's nude or semi-nude in the issue, which isn't the case.

The Alba example is not a good one because Alba is in the Playboy magazine. There is also the issue of tabloids who use celebrities images all the time but this is also not totally on the mark. I think the best thing for Boutros to do is to talk to a lawer the line where you can and can not do things is vague. It could be that the images are different enough that they could be use, but I am guessing.

Oh one more thing Boutros, your internet source may own the rights to those pictures you are using. So it is more likely they would be doing the sueing.

I dunno... there is a certain amount you can get away with thanks to parody law..... its a good question. Google parody law and see what you can figure out.

if you made em an obvious charicature, you'd be pretty safe. but i took just enough entertainment law to know you should be asking a lawyer :D

Here's some common sense:
When in doubt about legal matters, always contact and secure the advice of a lawyer. Law is what they do, and who you should go to.

Seek out a entertainment lawyer and pay the small fee(s) they'd charge for you to get a specific answer to your question. You might even get lucky and get the answers pro bono--and not pay at all.
Its safer and wiser to do this rather than solicit the info on a internet site--especially when you are asking it regarding a commercial venture of your own.
Why put your company and venture at potential risk, just to save a few ( perceived) dollars.
Cover your butt properly, seek professional advice.

We here is the wrong kinds of "professionals" to answer this question.

I think it falls into a fuzzy area of entertainment law (which is where lawyers live), meaning it all ultimately depends on a how the celebrity in question feels about it.

The law permits journalists to photograph and report on the activities of public figures, under the provision that it is newsworthy, and most celebs tolerate a certain degree of fan art and trading of their likenesses, as publicity is what makes their bank accounts go round. Charicature is normally permitted under copyright provision regarding satire and paraody. But some people may well make take exception to non-news-related commerical use of their image, and its use in a gambling related product might suggest endorsement of an activity many people frown upon, which is a good way to court trouble.

Some celebrities may also own (or their respective studios may own) various trademarks that can restrict you from using all or part of their image, or portraying it in a certain manner.

I would tread carefully. If nothing else, get it in writing from your client that they have permission to use the celebs likeness (cya), so if they do incur the ire of a celebrity, you are out of the line of fire.

Or, as mentioned earlier, call a lawyer. We are all just a bunch of armchair lawyers here.

The Alba example is not a good one because Alba is in the Playboy magazine. There is also the issue of tabloids who use celebrities images all the time but this is also not totally on the mark.

I didn't say Alba wasn't in the magazine; I said she's claiming that the cover photo implies that she's nude inside. Two different issues.

Your tabloid example isn't relevant because the pictures published in them are either supplied by the celebrity's publicist or purchased from paparazzi. Those individuals own the rights to the images and can assign them as they see fit.

In Boutros' case, he's preparing accurate images (not caricatures) of celebrities to include in a slot machine. Such an inclusion would imply the celebrity's endorsement of the game. Some celebrities do license their likeness for slot machines (Regis Philbin, George Lopez, Drew Carey, to name but a few). The difference is those folks are compensated for their image.

To be sure, Boutros should let the lawyers hash it out, but it seems to me that if he's working from images he downloaded off the 'net, his project is several steps shy of doing all it needs to in order to be on firm footing.

Hi All,

I'm currently making extremely accurate Flash reproductions of famous celebrity photos taken off the internet. The intent is to use the images in various casino games produced by my company. The images are all 100% Flash and no original photo.

My question is, is it legal to use a recognizable, very accurate likeness of a celebrity for commercial use even if it isn't a photograph?

Thanks.

You've actually answered your own question. You took the photos that you are hand tracing or whatever off the net. Were they your photos, were you given permission to take them or use them publicly?

You are infringing on a number of levels, you using someone elses photos for your flash work. And the Right to publicity for the celebrity is also a possible infringement.

RIGHT OF PUBLICITY: The "right of publicity" is a right under state law (as opposed to under federal law like copyright) that every person has the right to control the commercial use of his or her identity. For example, an advertiser may not use a famous person's picture to endorse a product without getting the famous person's permission to do so. The scope of the right of publicity varies from state to state, and some states have held that only celebrities, and not ordinary people, have a right of publicity.

Since the early 1900s, famous people have enjoyed a "right to publicity" -- meaning the right to control the revenues generated from their name or face. The laws were intended to prevent others from capitalizing on a celebrity's fame on baseball cards or in advertisements and endorsements.

The California Supreme Court shifted the legal landscape in 2001 by ruling that a Southern California artist was barred from selling T-shirts and lithographs with the images of the Three Stooges. Setting a new standard, the justices said the work must be more than a mere likeness and somehow "transform" the celebrity's image by adding enough of the artist's "significant creative elements."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/05/13/MN273668.DTL

Keep in mind that most major stars have staff who search for misuse of their likenesses and will take legal action when they find someone taking advantage of their fame as you propose to do. You are on thin legal ice here and you need to tread very carefully.

Just because you have made something other than a photo from the originals, the original photographer holds the rights to any derivative work. And your work is derivative. If I was any of the parties involved I'd sue the pants off you.

Phacker - So have permission to use those copywritten songs in your e-cards that you sell on-line then?

The cards that I've sold don't have copyright protected material in them. Yes I am crossing a thin line with the others but they are parodies and not for profit.