Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TKoProductions
Wrong....all he would have to prove is that it represents his "likeness."
|
Correct.
It's enough that it looks like him, and that anyone could "reasonably" believe it's actually him if they saw the ad.
The most relevant legal precedent is probably a case I heard about a few years back, where a look-alike actor impersonating Kris Kristofferson was sued for endorsing a rib and burger joint -- without making it clear enough that it wasn't REALLY KK.
Absurd. True.
j-