My fascination with Olvia Munn is well-documented here at YM, so you can imagine my dismay at a developing legal imbroglio involving the aforementioned host of G4′s Attack of the Show and comic book retailer Heavy Ink. The dispute in question involves a book solicited by Heavy Ink entitled Celebrity Showdown Olivia Munn. Munn’s legal team is putting pressure on Heavy Ink to ‘cease and desist all futher production, advertising, distribution and other exploitation of the Comic Book, remove all advertisements, and destroy all copies of the Comic Book.’
I’m not a lawyer, but I think these are incredibly muddy waters – I can understand Ms. Munn’s reaction (if indeed this is her reaction – it’s entirely possible that her legal counsel is simply being proactive in trying to defend their client’s image/rights/etc, rather than Munn siccing her hounds on Heavy Ink…). On the other hand, Heavy Ink is not the publisher of the comic in question – according to Travis Corcoran, President of Heavy Ink: ‘…the item offered for sale is not “our” comic book – it is created by a third party and offered for sale through our website.‘
The ever-clever Boing Boing (where I first took notice of this issue) points out (via Geoff Gerber) that Ms. Munn may actually have a legal leg to stand on, depending on whether or not the law considers Celebrity Showdown to be a ‘parody’.
Personally, I’ve not seen the content of the comic in question, but it doesn’t seem out of line with the innumerable celebrity-based indie comics that littered the shelves of my local comic shop back in the 80′s and 90′s. I’m curious if the content itself is questionable or if the complaint is simply about the use of Ms. Munn’s image.
Update: Jesse Thorn of maximumfun.org comments thusly (I post this because it kind of sums up my feelings on the subject…)
I’ve been on Olivia’s show a couple times, and met her. She’s a very nice lady, and this whole thing kind of creeps me out. I don’t see any evidence that it’s parody – if it is, I suppose it’s legal, but that doesn’t make it less creepy.
I’m a (very minor) public figure myself, and if someone made a hyper-sexualized comic book about me without my permission, I’d be pretty upset. And I think I’d have grounds to be.
Again: may be completely legal, and I’m no fan of lawyer-bullying, but I’m not crazy about it otherwise.
Ms. Munn's Jan. 31 Tweet http://twitter.com/oliviamunn/status/8459073525 suggests that her lawyers are acting at her direction.
As for the issue being use of her likeness, right of publicity is about unauthorized use of identity. Generally, it does not distinguish between name only or image. The issue is whether the use is sufficiently recognizable to invoke her identity. Once it does, the question is whether a particular state has an exception that applies or whether the courts in a given state will find that it is protected free speech.
Hi Goeff –
Well, at least Ms. Munn's stand seems pretty cut and dried, and as for whether or not 'Celebrity Showdown Olivia Munn' is sufficiently recognizable, I'd give that an affirmative. Does this mean that each state can rule independently on whether or not the comic can be offered for sale?
Ms. Munn could bring a right of publicity claim as a civil lawsuit in any state where she could get jurisdiction. For a suit against Heavy Ink, any state into which Heavy Ink sells the comic; for Antarctic Press, anywhere they distribute the comic; but for Mr. Denham, the jurisdictional question is more challenging. Her choice of jurisdiction will have an impact on which state's law will apply. Once she gets a ruling in one state, it will likely extend to other states. An injunction in one state may be limited to that state or may extend depending on how the claim is framed and how the court would rule. Damages however, if framed in terms of Ms. Munn's lost opportunity, would likely be nationwide. If framed in terms of lost royalties on the comic, it mightbe limited to a single state.
All of that assumes that Ms. Munn would prevail, which it is too early to say.