Apple Threatens Steve Jobs Doll Maker With Lawsuit 314
redletterdave writes "Apple has allegedly threatened to sue Chinese company 'In Icons' over its eerily realistic 12-inch action figure of Steve Jobs, the company's late founder and CEO. The 1:6 scale model, which was said to be distributed by DiD Corp. in late February, comes with the clothes and accessories popularized by Jobs, such as the black faux turtleneck, blue jeans and sneakers. The figurine is packaged in a box that looks like Walter Isaacson's 'Steve Jobs' biography cover, and also comes with a 'One More Thing...' backdrop, as well as two red apples, including one with a bite in it. To make it extra creepy, the doll's realistic head sculpt features Jobs' famous unblinking stare. Apple reportedly wrote 'In Icons', telling the Chinese manufacturer that any toy that resembles Apple's logo or products, or Job's name or appearance, is a 'criminal offense.' Attorneys believe a Steve Jobs action figure released after his death violates the 'right of publicity,' which is a state law that protects one's image, voice, photograph, identity or signature from being used commercially without consent. Furthermore, California's Celebrity Rights Act in 1985 protects a celebrity's personality rights up to 70 years after their death."
Re:Apple is filing this? (Score:5, Interesting)
That's a bit strange, no? You'd think Job's family would be the one filing, not Apple, unless they own his personality rights. Which would be kinda creepy, if you think about it.
It's got to be either a) Apple is doing this at the request of his family/estate or b) Steve Jobs gave his personality rights to Apple...which while creepy is not all that far fetched considering how he micromanaged everything to death (no pun intended).
I want one! (Score:2, Interesting)
I could do so many things with one of those...
Re:Apple can sue about Jobs doll? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:California = International Law? (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple uses dead celebrities in their advertising. (Score:3, Interesting)
Hypocrisy.
Apple is guilty of the far more serious crime of having dead celebrities endorse their products in TV commercials [wikipedia.org].
Typical Apple, talking the talk, without walking the walk. Again.
Re:Apple can sue about Jobs doll? (Score:5, Interesting)
They're using CA's law that says Jobs' estate owns his image for 75 years after death, the problem is, how do they enforce CA law if the dolls never leave China?
Criminal offense? (Score:4, Interesting)
How on earth does this get to be a criminal offense rather than civil one?
Re:Apple can sue about Jobs doll? (Score:3, Interesting)
Furthermore, California's Celebrity Rights Act in 1985 protects a celebrity's personality rights up to 70 years after their death.
How constitutional is this, given that we do not (yet) have a two-tier justice system? Either everyone's personality rights are "protected" or no one's. Unless we do have First Class and Second Class citiziens, of course.
Re:Apple can sue about Jobs doll? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Apple is filing this? (Score:4, Interesting)
I can imagine a third possiblity: The Chinese company have contacted Apple, asking them to sue them for a share in the proceeds - knowing full well that whatever the judgement will be, it won't make any difference for their ability to sell their product, and it is great publicity; sales are going straight to orbit.
What do you mean, I'm cynical? I am a very sensitive and thoughtful individual ;-)