Burdens of the Dead: Postmortem Right of Publicity Statutes and the Dormant Commerce Clause

C. Ronald
{"title":"Burdens of the Dead: Postmortem Right of Publicity Statutes and the Dormant Commerce Clause","authors":"C. Ronald","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3195000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Note argues that current state postmortem right of publicity statutes are unconstitutional under the dormant Commerce Clause. The dormant Commerce Clause doctrine is an implicit restriction within the Commerce Clause that prohibits states from regulating interstate commerce. The current patchwork of state postmortem right of publicity statutes violates the dormant Commerce Clause in two different ways. \nFirst, postmortem right of publicity laws containing “all comers” provisions like those in Indiana, Washington, and the proposed bill in New York violate the dormant Commerce Clause because they can be applied extraterritorially to the estates of nonresident individuals. By allowing non-resident estates to bring right of publicity actions, these laws can be used to stifle commerce occurring wholly outside of the state—precisely the sort of burden the dormant Commerce Clause prohibits. \nSecond, even those postmortem right of publicity laws that do not contain “all comers” provisions can violate the dormant Commerce Clause when applied to certain businesses operating without distinct geographic boundaries, such as websites. Courts have struck down state laws regulating website content in the past under the dormant Commerce Clause, reasoning that such laws create de facto national regulation and impose the policy preferences of one state on other states in which a particular website can be accessed. The same principle can be applied to state postmortem right of publicity laws, which in effect require website operators using the likenesses of deceased individuals to tailor their business practices to the most expansive postmortem right of publicity provisions. In this way, state postmortem right of publicity statutes impose significant costs on Internet content providers by adding another group of right holders with which those content providers must negotiate. The desire to protect individuals from commercial exploitation after death—especially beloved celebrities like Prince—is understandable. The dormant Commerce Clause, however, prohibits one state from designing the means by which that protection is afforded across the entire country. \nThis Note proposes that the only means of remedying the constitutional issue posed by the current patchwork of postmortem right of publicity statutes is through federal action. Congress must either create a federal right of publicity or explicitly authorize states to create their own right of publicity laws. \nPart I traces the origination and evolution of state postmortem right of publicity laws over the past forty years, concluding with New York’s recently proposed bill. Part II examines current dormant Commerce Clause jurisprudence and how the dormant Commerce Clause has been applied to invalidate extraterritorial state laws and regulations of the Internet. Using the recently proposed bill in New York as a case study, Part III shows that: (1) postmortem right of publicity laws with “all comers” provisions are facially unconstitutional under the dormant Commerce Clause; and (2) other postmortem right of publicity laws are unconstitutional as applied to Internet businesses. Part III then concludes by suggesting that congressional consideration of the right of publicity is necessary to alleviate dormant Commerce Clause violations created by current state right of publicity statutes.","PeriodicalId":222420,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts","volume":"103 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3195000","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This Note argues that current state postmortem right of publicity statutes are unconstitutional under the dormant Commerce Clause. The dormant Commerce Clause doctrine is an implicit restriction within the Commerce Clause that prohibits states from regulating interstate commerce. The current patchwork of state postmortem right of publicity statutes violates the dormant Commerce Clause in two different ways. First, postmortem right of publicity laws containing “all comers” provisions like those in Indiana, Washington, and the proposed bill in New York violate the dormant Commerce Clause because they can be applied extraterritorially to the estates of nonresident individuals. By allowing non-resident estates to bring right of publicity actions, these laws can be used to stifle commerce occurring wholly outside of the state—precisely the sort of burden the dormant Commerce Clause prohibits. Second, even those postmortem right of publicity laws that do not contain “all comers” provisions can violate the dormant Commerce Clause when applied to certain businesses operating without distinct geographic boundaries, such as websites. Courts have struck down state laws regulating website content in the past under the dormant Commerce Clause, reasoning that such laws create de facto national regulation and impose the policy preferences of one state on other states in which a particular website can be accessed. The same principle can be applied to state postmortem right of publicity laws, which in effect require website operators using the likenesses of deceased individuals to tailor their business practices to the most expansive postmortem right of publicity provisions. In this way, state postmortem right of publicity statutes impose significant costs on Internet content providers by adding another group of right holders with which those content providers must negotiate. The desire to protect individuals from commercial exploitation after death—especially beloved celebrities like Prince—is understandable. The dormant Commerce Clause, however, prohibits one state from designing the means by which that protection is afforded across the entire country. This Note proposes that the only means of remedying the constitutional issue posed by the current patchwork of postmortem right of publicity statutes is through federal action. Congress must either create a federal right of publicity or explicitly authorize states to create their own right of publicity laws. Part I traces the origination and evolution of state postmortem right of publicity laws over the past forty years, concluding with New York’s recently proposed bill. Part II examines current dormant Commerce Clause jurisprudence and how the dormant Commerce Clause has been applied to invalidate extraterritorial state laws and regulations of the Internet. Using the recently proposed bill in New York as a case study, Part III shows that: (1) postmortem right of publicity laws with “all comers” provisions are facially unconstitutional under the dormant Commerce Clause; and (2) other postmortem right of publicity laws are unconstitutional as applied to Internet businesses. Part III then concludes by suggesting that congressional consideration of the right of publicity is necessary to alleviate dormant Commerce Clause violations created by current state right of publicity statutes.
死者的负担:死后公示权法规和休眠商业条款
本注认为,根据休眠的商业条款,现行的州死后公示权法规违宪。隐性商业条款原则是商业条款中的一项隐含限制,禁止各州监管州际贸易。目前拼凑的各州公示权追诉法以两种不同的方式违反了隐性商业条款。首先,包含“所有人”条款的死后公示权法律,如印第安纳州和华盛顿州的法律,以及纽约州的拟议法案,违反了休眠的商业条款,因为它们可以在域外适用于非居民个人的遗产。通过允许非居民地产提起公开权诉讼,这些法律可以用来扼杀完全发生在州外的商业活动——这正是休眠商业条款所禁止的那种负担。其次,即使是那些不包含“所有人”条款的事后公示权法律,在适用于某些没有明确地理边界的企业(如网站)时,也可能违反休眠商业条款。法院已经推翻了过去在休眠的商业条款下管理网站内容的州法律,理由是这些法律创造了事实上的国家监管,并将一个州的政策偏好强加给了其他可以访问特定网站的州。同样的原则也适用于各州的死后公开权法律,这些法律实际上要求网站经营者利用死者的肖像来调整他们的商业行为,以适应最广泛的死后公开权规定。通过这种方式,各州的事后公示权法规增加了另一组权利持有人,这些内容提供商必须与之谈判,从而给互联网内容提供商带来了巨大的成本。保护个人在死后不受商业剥削的愿望是可以理解的,尤其是像普林斯这样受人爱戴的名人。然而,休眠的商业条款禁止一个州设计在全国范围内提供这种保护的手段。本说明提出,补救目前拼凑的事后公示权法规所造成的宪法问题的唯一途径是通过联邦行动。国会必须要么制定联邦宣传权,要么明确授权各州制定自己的宣传权法。第一部分追溯了过去四十年来各州死后公示权法律的起源和演变,并以纽约州最近提出的法案作为结语。第二部分考察了当前的“不活跃商业条款”的判例,以及“不活跃商业条款”如何被应用于使域外国家的互联网法律法规无效。第三部分以最近在纽约提出的法案为例,表明:(1)在休眠的商业条款下,带有“所有角落”条款的事后公示权法表面上是违宪的;(2)适用于互联网企业的其他事后公示权法律违宪的。第三部分的结论是,国会对公示权的考虑对于减轻现行州公示权法规造成的隐性商业条款违反是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信