Ford motor co, 849 f2d 460 (9th cir1988) (hereinafter midler i ) in brief, bette midler filed a complaint on april 29, 1986 after advertising agency young & rubicam inc created a television commercial using a midler sound-alike. Home page current: 2 tco f in midler v ford motor co bette midler sued ford for unauthorized appropriation explain what appropriation is tell me what type of civil claim appropriation is and what a person has to. Midler v ford motor co 549 f 2d 460 (9th cir 1988) authored by cecelia hubbert ford motor company and its advertising agency made a television commercial to. In the case of midler v ford motor company , the lower court's decision was remanded and sent back for re-trial this means midler won her case in appellate court, and it was returned to the.
Ford motor co,9 the advertising agency then recommended the carter version and offered to in demnify frito-lay for any claims that might arise from using. Ford motor co, bette midler sued ford for unauthorized appropriation explain what appropriation is tell me what type of civil claim appropriation is and what a person has to prove to win damages for it. -2- the decision whether to grant a new trial is one addressed to the trial court's discretion, and the trial court's decision will not be reversed absent an abuse of. Ford motor co 19 by holding that the right of publicity may be infringed by the appropriation of a person's voice 2 0 midler ac- knowledged that modem advertising techniques can suggest an endorse.
The value of this attribute is what the market would have paid for midler (plaintiff) to sing the commercial in person plaintiff has made a showing, sufficient to defeat summary judgment, that defendant appropriated her identity for it's own profit in order to sell its product. 3344 in midler v ford motor co, 849 f2d 460 (9th cir 1988), this court rejected bette midler's section 3344 claim concerning a ford television. We are looking to hire attorneys to help contribute legal content to our site if you are interested, please contact us at [email protected.
In the first of the ninth circuit's important decisions regarding the publicity right, in midler v ford motor co 26 , the court ruled that a celebrity's right of publicity included protection. Ford motor co, 849 f2d 460 (9th cir 1988), this court rejected bette midler's section 3344 claim concerning a ford television commercial in which a midler sound-alike sang a song which midler had made famous. Ain't nothin' like the real thing, baby : the right of publicity and the singing voice v ford motor co1° in midler, the ninth circuit court of. Young & rubicam, ford motor co's (ford) (defendant) ad agency, could not get bette midler (plaintiff) to re-create her 1970s hit do you want to dance for its television commercial for ford (defendant), so it hired a former plaintiff backup singer to impersonate her voice. 20 years ago in the case between legendary crooner bette midler and the ford motor company 4 further discussed below, ford initially offered midler the opportunity to perform one of her songs for an upcoming commercial.
The district court entered judgment for ford and young&rubicam, and ms midler appealedjudicial opinionnoonan, circuit judgeat issue in this case is only the protection of midler's voicebert lahr once sued adell chemical co for selling lestoil by means of a commercial in which an imitation of lahr's voice accompanied a cartoon of a duck. Midler v ford motor co, 849 f2d 460 (9th cir 1988) is a united states court of appeals case in which bette midler sought remedy against ford court, united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit. Ford motor co 1998, 849 f2d 460 (9th cir 1988), the holding court determined something as distinctive as someone's voice, which is part of their identity, is protected from appropriation.
In midler v ford motor co, we held that when a distinctive voice of a professional singer is widely known and is deliberately imitated in order to sell a product, the sellers have appropriated what is not theirs and have committed a tort in california. Profile of publishing and copyright lawyer jonathan kirsch contact his los angeles, california office. Publicity rights can be best illustrated through the case of midler v ford motor co & others 6 in this case the advertising company wanted to use a song which was in the voice of bette midler for the advertisement of the company, but ms midler refused to give her version of song for the advertisementthe company then hired another singer to.
Midler v ford motor co 849 f2d 460 (9th cir 1988) facts: in 1985, ford motor company (defendant) and it advertising agency, young & rubicam, inc advertised the ford lincoln mercury with a series of nineteen 30 or 60 second television commercials in its the yuppie campaign. Bette midler, a celebrated singer, dancer, actress, and comedienne, sued an automobile company and an advertising agency for airing a commercial that used a sound-alike of midler singing a song from her album entitled.
Ford motor co (ford) (defendant) aired a commercial in which they had a bette midler (plaintiff) sound alike sing one of midler's songs ford had permission from the song's copyright owner, but not from midler. Midler v ford motor co, 849 f2d 460 (9th cir 1988) midler had sued ula and the mercury sable people for infringing on her trademark, and won her case by issuing. Ford motor company case brief 849 f2d 460 case synopsis: plaintiff appealed from a judgment of the united states district court for the central district of california granting summary judgment in favor of defendants in plaintiff's action for appropriation of her distinctive voice for use in an advertisement.