Q 1. Roscoe Ruins is a graphic artist who makes a modest living designing T-shirts and selling them to vendors all over Los Angeles. One of his designs includes two marionettes, wooden sticklike figures, with the faces of “The Tonight Show” host Jimmy Fallon and “The Late Show” host Stephen Colbert. The strings on the marionettes are being held by two abstract figures labeled NBC and CBS. The lettering on the T-shirt says, “We don’t always know what we’re doing, but when they pull the strings we dance!” While the message on the T-shirt didn’t seem to make much sense, in the celebrity dominated environs of Los Angeles, the T-shirts sold well. Colbert apparently laughed the satire off; Fallon, however, sued for infringement of his right of publicity. “Using his image without permission for a commercial purpose was an illegal appropriation,” his attorney argued. Ruins’s attorney disagreed and argued that the use of such image was permitted under the law. How would a court rule over the case? 2. The Red Gap Monitor newspaper published the following item in its weekly Police Blotter section: Charles Ruggles, of 487 Ash, was arrested and charged with trespass on Tuesday when he refused to leave Martin’s Appliance Store on Kenworthy. The owner of the store, Melvin Martin, told the police that Ruggles, who is 18 years old, had been “hanging around” the store for days, bothering customers. When Ruggles refused to leave, Martin said that he had called police. Ruggles’s father, Donald, said that his son was only asking Martin for a job, such as washing windows, and was not causing him any harm. Charles is a severely mentally retarded individual according to residents in the neighborhood. The Ruggles sued the Red Gap Monitor for invasion of privacy, arguing that while a few close friends and teachers knew of Charles’s mental problems, his condition was not generally known, and publishing that fact in a newspaper was clearly offensive. 1. What will the Ruggles have to prove to win the private facts case? 1. Will they win the case? 3. In 2006, Birch Bay Press had published the autobiography of the Grammy-winning country and western singer Natalie Prescott, who has been a fixture in the Nashville music scene for nearly 15 years. Her career has had its ups and downs, and in her autobiography, she explains that she experienced the same kind of ups and downs in her personal life. In an early section of the book, Prescott tells of her early life, growing up with her brother, Andrew Prescott (with whom she has not talked to in more than a decade), and her alcoholic father. Her mother had died when she was only seven years old. Prescott said that when she and her brother were in their early teen years, their father, and even some of his friends, frequently sexually abused them both. The abuse didn’t stop until her father died in an automobile accident when Natalie was 15 years old and her brother was 14 years old. They both lived in a foster home until they reached adulthood. The book contains pictures of both the Prescotts at various stages of their early life. Natalie’s brother is now a successful stockbroker in Philadelphia. After reading this portion of the book (which was on the bestseller list for 15 weeks), he brought an invasion of privacy suit against his sister Natalie and the Birch Bay Press. He argues that the use of his name and his photo is an appropriation of his name and likeness without his consent. He says that the revelations of his early life—especially being sexually abused by his father and his father’s friends—were a publication of private facts. He has never told anyone about this abuse, and he was extremely humiliated and embarrassed when the story was made public. 1. Will Prescott win his appropriation case? Why, or why not? 1. What will Prescott have to show to win his private facts case? 1. Will he win the private facts case? 4. Kitty Kat Promotions is an advertising firm located in Denver, Colorado. One of Kitty Kat Promotions’s biggest clients is Diana Prince, a plastic surgeon who practices in the Cherry Creek section of Denver, Colorado. Selina Kyle, the owner of Kitty Kat Promotions, decides to print some ads of Prince’s services along with photographs of her clients in the 5280 Magazine, which has a monthly distribution of 85,000. Kyle asks Prince to provide her with some pictures she uses when discussing her procedures with her clients. Prince gives Kyle some photographs of one of her former clients, former sitcom star Karen Starr. Karen is now a stay-at-home mom who lives in suburban Denver, although at one time she was a star of the sitcom Roommates. At one time, Starr and Prince were close friends, and Prince had performed plastic surgery on Starr several years ago. Kyle uses two pictures of Starr. The pictures show her torso from her neck to her knees, one from the front and one from the rear. In the pictures, Starr is wearing a small white bikini. Kyle used these pictures as ads in the 5280 Magazine. The advertisements do not use Starr’s name or specifically state what procedure she had completed. The copy of the advertisement, however, reads: “Are you unhappy with your body? Is your husband unhappy with your body? Come see Dr. Diana Prince, the mommy makeover specialist. Nobody will be unhappy with your body ever again.” When Starr sees these ads in the magazine, she is upset. While she signed a consent form to have the pictures taken, the consent release said that the pictures would only be used for office consultations and other discussions with clients. She did not agree to have her picture used for advertisements. In addition, Starr did not get a “mommy makeover” from Prince. Although she now has young children, she had plastic surgery before having children. While her face is not shown in the photos, she is mortified to have pictures of her body in such a popular magazine that many of her friends read. Things escalate quickly when Kyle refuses to apologize to Starr. Starr argues that Kyle has violated her privacy and that she can no longer live the quiet life she has been enjoying in suburban Colorado. Starr files a number of suits against both Kyle and Kitty Kat Promotions. Starr sues Prince and Kitty Kat Promotions for intrusion of privacy, arguing that using her pictures in a magazine that many of her friends read is embarrassing. Starr also sues Prince and Kitty Kat Promotions for appropriation, based on the agreement that she signed with Prince. Finally, Starr sues Prince and Kitty Kat Promotions for disclosure of private facts. At the trial, Starr testifies that she had previously discussed her procedures in a generic way toward the end of her career because she wanted to bring attention to the pressure that is put on actresses as they age. Starr, however, has never publically admitted to or specified exactly what procedures she had done. 1. Will Starr win her intrusion case? Why, or why not? 1. Will Star win her appropriation case? 1. Will Star win her private facts case?