Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves The Hebrew University of Jerusalem's claims against General Motors LLC (GM) for using Albert Einstein's image in a 2009 advertisement without authorization. The court considered GM's motion for summary judgment on claims under the Lanham Act, California's Unfair Competition Law, and right of publicity. The court granted summary judgment to GM on the first two claims due to insufficient evidence of consumer confusion and lack of implied endorsement by Einstein. However, the court found genuine issues of material fact regarding the right of publicity under New Jersey law. The court examined whether a postmortem right of publicity exists for Einstein, focusing on lifetime exploitation and testamentary intent. The plaintiff claimed a right through Einstein’s will, while GM contended that no such right existed. The court applied the doctrine of probable intent to interpret Einstein’s will, considering extrinsic evidence of his intentions. Ultimately, the court denied summary judgment on the right of publicity claims, allowing the case to proceed on these grounds, while dismissing the Lanham Act and UCL claims.
Legal Issues Addressed
Doctrine of Probable Intentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court considered the doctrine of probable intent to ascertain whether Einstein intended to include publicity rights in the Trust, given the will's language and extrinsic evidence.
Reasoning: The Plaintiff argues, under New Jersey's probable intent doctrine, that Einstein intended for these rights to be included... The court will evaluate this doctrine, which aims to ascertain the testator's intentions based on actual actions and the context of the Will's creation.
Lanham Act and Unfair Competition Claimssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court granted summary judgment dismissing the Lanham Act and California UCL claims due to lack of evidence of consumer confusion and the advertisement not implying endorsement.
Reasoning: The court addressed a motion for summary judgment from General Motors LLC (GM) concerning claims brought by The Hebrew University of Jerusalem regarding the use of an image of Albert Einstein in an advertisement... The court granted the motion in part, dismissing claims related to the Lanham Act and California’s Unfair Competition Law.
Postmortem Right of Publicity Durationsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court deferred ruling on the duration of any potential postmortem right of publicity until it is determined whether such a right passed to the plaintiff.
Reasoning: The court deferred ruling on the duration of the right of publicity until it is determined whether it passed to the plaintiff, mentioning that unless the duration exceeds 50 years, the right may have expired by the time of the alleged infringement.
Right of Publicity Under New Jersey Lawsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court considered whether a postmortem right of publicity exists for Albert Einstein under New Jersey law, considering factors such as lifetime exploitation and testamentary intent.
Reasoning: The court noted that New Jersey law governs the determination of whether a postmortem right of publicity exists for Einstein, and highlighted several issues for consideration: the existence of such a right, the necessity of the decedent's lifetime exploitation of that right, evidence of Einstein's exploitation, and whether the Plaintiff inherited that right through Einstein's will.
Summary Judgment Standardssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court applied the standard that the burden lies with the moving party to show no genuine issue of material fact exists, which then shifts to the nonmoving party to demonstrate otherwise.
Reasoning: The court's decision also referenced the legal standards for summary judgment, indicating that the burden lies with the moving party to show no genuine issue of material fact exists, which then shifts to the nonmoving party to demonstrate otherwise.