Schwarzenegger Sues Over Bobblehead Doll

The Smoking Gun ^ | MAY 4, 2004

[calcowgirl]

MAY 4--Making good on his threat, Arnold Schwarzenegger has filed a lawsuit against the Ohio company selling a bobblehead doll featuring the name and likeness of the California governor. The politician/actor filed suit last Friday against the Ohio Discount Merchandise company, alleging that the small firm had improperly hijacked his image for commercial purposes. The Los Angeles Superior Court complaint came a day after Schwarzenegger lawyer Martin Singer sent the bobblehead firm a blistering letter (a copy of which you'll find below) noting that Schwarzenegger was entitled to "substantial damages" for the "unauthorized commercial exploitation" of the Republican pol's image on the $19.99 doll. With the exception of movie promotion, Singer noted that Schwarzenegger does not permit the use of his likeness on commercial products in the United States. The Schwarzenegger doll, which went on sale about a month ago, is one of several bobbleheads featuring politicians that the Ohio firm sells (John Kerry, Wesley Clark, and Howard Dean also retail for $19.99, while George W. Bush would only set you back $14.95). The bobblehead company contends that since Schwarzenegger is now an elected official, his image is public domain. (3 pages)
--------

3 page "blistering letter" viewable at TSG

[Phantom Lord]

I think Arnold is gonna lose this one.

[Hodar]

He is now a public servant, and as such his likeness is public domain. Just like the Carter, Clinton and Ronald Reagan Halloween masks.

One of the prices you pay, when you are a public figure. I don't think he has a legal leg to stand on.

[laotzu]

since Schwarzenegger is now an elected official, his image is public domain

Sounds like a good point.

[GaltMeister]

Get over it, Ahnold. Seems like you have enough to worry about in CA, without having to get wrapped around the axle over silly stuff like this.

[scooter2]

If someone produced a bobblehead doll of me, I'd be flattered. Of course I'm not a mega-celeb like Ahhhnold.

[NCPAC]

As well he should.

[Sgt_Schultze]

I followed the link and read the entire complaint. Apparently Arnold's agents are also claiming copyright on the contents of the letter they sent. In the copy, they specifically forbid posting the letter to the internet. Maybe John will be receiving a threat letter as well demanding the elimination of the links to the posted document.

[ZULU]

Baloney.

Schwarzenegger is now a public figure and his face is in the public forum.

His actions in making such a big deal over this shows what a narrow mind and large ego the Gubernator has.

[bvw]

Page Three of that letter is interesting. Claims the letter itself is copyright. That's a different claim than confidentiality of communication.

Also interesting is the reference to the 1988 case against Ford Motors when they used a voice-alike of Bette Midler in a commercial. That was found to be a violation. Amazing!

A bad caselaw that, perhaps.

[Carry_Okie]

The next step.

[calcowgirl]

Arnold has sued many times for use of his name or likeness on products... but that was before he was Governor. While the Bette Midler precedent may have applied before, I'm not so sure it will now. It's tough being a public figure. No royalties! LOL.

[kjam22]

He's just suing to help the people of Kolle for neia

[LearnsFromMistakes]

Did you see the doll? Carrying a weapon and ammo. Unless this is standard gov garb in CA...

[SunStar]

Governor Schwarzenegger is a public figure. He will lose the lawsuit, IMHO.

[johnfrink]

The interesting thing is whether or not Arnold retains the rights to images of himself that trade upon his image as governor while referencing earlier parts of his career.

Say, for example, some image of him, dressed in Terminator garb, in front of the state house in Sacramento. On one hand it is referencing the public aspect of his persona, yet on the other hand is referencing a copyrighted image. Yet his public persona as governor depends upon his image as a tough movie star--he routinely fills (or he used to, anyway) his speeches with quips from him movies. So if he is using those copyrighted expressions for political currency, do they become public domain?

It's quite interesting to think about the ramifications of this.

[Hodar]

Carrying a weapon and ammo. Unless this is standard gov garb in CA...

Yes, I have seen the doll. The bobblehead doll with his likeness is fine; as he is now an elected official, and his likeness is public domain. I don't like the rules, but as I understand them; those are the rules.

Regarding the guns and ammo; this would fall under the 'satire' legal precidents, which are pretty open to intrepretation. Now, if he were depicted as doing something obscene, Arnold could very likely file (and win) for defamation of character. But as it stands, and as the product is depicted; I honestly think he's going to lose this one.

[calcowgirl]

So if he is using those copyrighted expressions for political currency, do they become public domain?

I agree... it will offer interesting legal arguments for sure. My gut says he left himself wide open... and he will lose. Good thing Maria has that big trust account! LOL.

[freekitty]

Where's your sense of humor, Arnold?

[1L]

I haven't read the petition, but it appears they sued in LA county state court. If the Ohio company doesn't have any meaningful "contacts" with California (i.e., they haven't done business in the state, sent sales reps there, etc.), there may not be personal jurisdiction over them. Most states have somewhat similar personal jurisdiction rules and and what's called long arm statutes. I'll confess an ignorance for all the facts, but I'll also bet the Ohio company is researching whether or not to file the California equivilent of a Texas special appearance, which contests jurisdiction without appearing.

Just a thought. We'll see what happens.