http://www.thebusinessofsports.com/2009/06/05/five-for-friday-june-5-2009/ News and opinions on the business side of sports Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:59:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 http://www.thebusinessofsports.com/2009/06/05/five-for-friday-june-5-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-5457 Dan Sun, 14 Jun 2009 23:36:33 +0000 http://www.thebusinessofsports.com/?p=1441#comment-5457 I like this article, very interesting. Thanks for sharing! I like this article, very interesting. Thanks for sharing!

]]> http://www.thebusinessofsports.com/2009/06/05/five-for-friday-june-5-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-5170 Jamie Favreau Sun, 07 Jun 2009 07:27:34 +0000 http://www.thebusinessofsports.com/?p=1441#comment-5170 The only thing that looks clearly like Tiger is his biceps. The only thing that looks clearly like Tiger is his biceps.

]]> http://www.thebusinessofsports.com/2009/06/05/five-for-friday-june-5-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-5137 Christopher Fri, 05 Jun 2009 17:00:01 +0000 http://www.thebusinessofsports.com/?p=1441#comment-5137 Regarding the TJ Maxx ad, Tiger doesn't even have to show an implied relationship with the company - under state "right of publicity" statutes, he just has to show that his image or likeness was used for commercial purposes without his consent. There are a number of "lookalike" cases out there under these statutes. (A claim for false association or false endorsement under the federal Lanham Act, however, would require the showing of a false relationship between the two parties). Regarding the TJ Maxx ad, Tiger doesn’t even have to show an implied relationship with the company – under state “right of publicity” statutes, he just has to show that his image or likeness was used for commercial purposes without his consent. There are a number of “lookalike” cases out there under these statutes. (A claim for false association or false endorsement under the federal Lanham Act, however, would require the showing of a false relationship between the two parties).

]]>