Understanding the legal ramifications of Rihanna vs. Topshop
Chart sensation Rihanna won a lawsuit against Topshop this week, this is the first time that a passing off case has been successfully argued after an image appeared on an item of clothing.
This week pop star Rihanna won a lawsuit in the United Kingdom (this is important) against popular fashion chain Topshop after claiming that the retail store had used an unflattering image of her on one of their t-shirts. The offending image can be seen here. Topshop had offered to settle for $5,000; Rihanna had claimed more than £3.5m in damages. Although the picture on the Topshop t-shirt was of her face was used, she was unable to claim any image royalties. She is also particularly upset because the image is very unflattering and the quality of the t-shirts is "poor" stating that "The base image of the first claimant [Rihanna] is of such an unflattering nature that it would not be approved."Thanks to a loop in the copyright law in the United Kingdom, the photographer owns the copyright, not Rihanna. Rihanna isn't the owner of the image or copyright in it. The UK, furthermore, does not have strict right of publicity laws like the United States. In other words, Topshop could sell the t-shirts in the UK because there has been little protection of the commercial value of one's persona in England. If the t-shirt was sold in the United States, the outcome of this lawsuit would likely be the same, but under different legal principles. Unlike the United Kingdom, the law in the United States allows celebrities to enjoy strong property rights in their persona and image. This has become an increasingly cloudy area of law with advances in new digital media. Rock band No Doubt won a lawsuit against Activision when it alleged an infringement of their right of publicity in the popular Rock Band video game. The game allowed users to unlock features and manipulate the No Doubt avatars to perform songs not approved by the band. Had the lawsuit been filed in the US, Rihanna’s lawsuit would have been a no-brainer, but the t-Shirt had only been sold in the UK, where these image rights don't exist.