Held: Parody exception to right of publicity

    Facts a bit complicated to go into in detail. The court reached the result by analogy to copyright, in part based on constitutional grounds. It cited favorably Kozinski's Samsung dissent, and Michael Madow's "Private Ownership of Public Image" article at 81 Calif. L. Rev. 125 (1993) (an excellent work, in my view).

    The court was interpreting Oklahoma's right of publicity statute, which is written in rather absolute terms, and with no parody or fair use qualifier.

    Cardtoons v. Major League Baseball Players Ass'n, 1994 WL 651132 (N.D. Okl. Oct. 25).

• Eugene Volokh, UCLA Law <volokh[_at_]law.ucla.edu>