box1 header1
Entry Detail
Terms of Use The data on this site is for education, insights, and entertainment, and is not to be used for commercial purposes. If you want to use content for noncommercial purposes, be kind and give us due credit. To read the full Terms of Use, click here.
Options Conduct New Search
Copy Permalink to this Item
 
No Doubt Enforces their Faces
Highest Court California Court of Appeal
Year Ended 2011
Plaintiffs No Doubt
Defendants Activision
Other No Other parties on file
Short Description When No Doubt agreed to license their likenesses for use in the "Band Hero" video game, they did not know the extent to which Activision, the game's developer, would utilize the computer-generated images (CGI) of the band members. No Doubt allowed Activision to use their CGI personas for advertising, packaging, etc., but Activision went much further, hiring lookalikes to act out the members' performances in order to create fully-functioning CGI characters that players could use in the game after "unlocking" them at various levels. No Doubt sued for violation of their publicity and deceptive business practices, and, regarding the contract they signed, fraudulent inducement, breach, and rescission. The state court initially removed the case to federal court saying Plaintiffs' actions were preempted by the Copyright Act, but the federal court disagreed and remanded back to state court; publicity rights were not synonymous with copyrights, since names and likenesses are not copyrightable at all, and the contract-related actions were also not copyright-related. Back in state court, Defendants filed an Anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss, which is a special motion, intended to protect First Amendment rights, that allows Defendants to dismiss claims that 1) relate to protected speech and 2) are unlikely to prevail at trial. Unfortunately for Defendants, the court sided with Plaintiffs. Regarding the publicity claims, the court found that life-like CGI versions of the band members were not "transformative," and thus protected speech, but were "conventional, more or less fungible, images" of the members that the band had the right to control. As to unfair competition claims, the court also found that Activision's use of the likenesses would confuse the public even if it was not "explicitly misleading," which some courts have required. Since Plaintiffs were likely to prevail on their claims, the Anti-SLAPP motion failed. - LSW

Legal Issues
Conflicts of Law Jurisdiction & Forum Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Constitutional Law First Amendment Anti-SLAPP Statutes
Contracts Breach Payment & Performance
  Enforceability Fraud/Fraudulent Inducement
  Equitable Remedies Rescission
General Affirmative Defenses Federal Preemption
Trademarks & Unfair Competition State Statute/Common Law Right of Publicity
    Unfair & Deceptive Trade Practices


Opinions No Doubt v. Activision Publishing, Inc.
192 Cal.App.4th 1018
California Court of Appeal , February 15, 2011 ( No. B223996 )


No Doubt v. Activision Publishing, Inc.
702 F.Supp.2d 1139
C.D. California , January 14, 2010 ( No. CV 09-8872 SVW (VBKx) )


Errors Do you see something that is not correct?
The Discography is an ongoing project. Some entries in the database are displayed in various stages of completion. If you see spelling or grammar issues, they are likely to be corrected in the near future as they're noticed by editors (they're on the "To Do" list, we promise). But If you notice errors regarding facts, legal conclusions, or other information, please contact us to let us know. We've done our best, but can't assure perfection. Thank you.


Related Searches Parties
Activision ( Defendant )
No Doubt ( Plaintiff )

Legal Issues
Conflicts of Law / Jurisdiction & Forum / Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Constitutional Law / First Amendment / Anti-SLAPP Statutes
Contracts / Breach / Payment & Performance
Contracts / Enforceability / Fraud/Fraudulent Inducement
Contracts / Equitable Remedies / Rescission
General / Affirmative Defenses / Federal Preemption
Trademarks & Unfair Competition / State Statute/Common Law / Right of Publicity
Trademarks & Unfair Competition / State Statute/Common Law / Unfair & Deceptive Trade Practices

Courts
California Court of Appeal (highest court)
C.D. California


permalink to this entry