Brief Jordan v. Jewel Food Stores Inc PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Brief Jordan v. Jewel Food Stores Inc PDF

Description

Blaw 280 09/24/20 Jordan v. Jewel Food Stores, Inc. Facts: Famous basketball player Michael Jordan did a special commemorative issue with Sports Illustrated magazine. Jewel Food Stores is a supermarket that operates 175 in Chicago. A Time sales representative provided Jewel with free magazine advertisements in exchange for the cost of supplementing and selling the magazines. Jewel created an ad that incorporated their logo, slogan, a text paragraph congratulating Michael Jordan and a photo of the basketball player shoes. Jordan sued Jewel for taking advantage of his image and infringing on his right of publicity. Jewel moved for summary judgment, claim that their ad was noncommercial and that they were protected under the First Amendment. Jordan filed a motion for summary judgment claiming that the advertisement was for commercial speech and that the use of his image violated his right of publicity. The federal district judge agreed with Jewel which Jordan appealed to the U.S Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit. Issue: What constitutes an advertisement as commercial or noncommercial speech and did it violate the plaintiffs right of publicity? Rule: Invasion of Privacy General rule: right of publicity under which public figures, celebrities and entertainers have a cause of action against defendants who without consent use the right holders’ names, likenesses or identities for commercial purposes Application: The plaintiff argued that the advertisement is commercial and that the first amendment does not protect the defendant. He argued that his image was being misused by the supermarket to benefit from and it wasn’t a simple congratulating ad. Therefore this violated his right of publicity. The defendant argued that their ad is noncommercial and that they are protected under the First Amendment. They argued that the advertisement was not selling any goods or services and therefore could not be labeled as commercial speech. The Supreme Court was in favor towards Jordan because upon close inspection of the advertisement and what categorized as commercial speech was not only limited to selling a product. Even though the ad appears to be congratulating Jordan, by incorporating Jewel’s logo and slogan, the court found that the ad was a form of image advertising. Therefore Jewel had something to gain from the advertisement by promoting their store in it. Conclusion: Jordan appealed to the U.S Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit. Which the Supreme court reversed the federal district court decision that the ad was noncommercial and the case was remanded....