Apple Sues Steve Jobs Figurine Maker Over Likeness

eldavojohn writes "Techdirt brings word that China-based MIC Gadget, the maker of a four inch 'SJ figurine,' is being sued by Apple to stop making the product. The fairly well detailed figurine went for $80 and the manufacturer offered updates as it quickly sold out of the first 300 and was subsequently sued before starting a second batch. The glasses, the black turtle neck, the salt and pepper beard, the blue jeans and the new balance sneakers — that is Steve Jobs' look and you don't even have to consider the smug look or the iPhone 4 in his hand while standing in a classic press event spotlight pose. So far, this notice for copyright infringement only exists for the 'SJ figurine' (no mention of Apple or Jobs in the store listing) but it appears other companies are allowing MIC Gadget some leeway with trademarks or perhaps they just haven't noticed yet. Could it be that Apple is just concerned that their followers are purchasing lead-painted false idols?"

Comments

Father Steve expressly forbid this!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Thou Shalt Not Make Graven Images or Question His Profits." It's right there in the Holy Mac User Guide, people!

What is the basis for the suit?

[brennanw]

Has Apple trademarked Jobs' image? Or is there some kind of international law that covers selling the likeness of someone without their permission?

I'm not being snarky, I genuinely don't know.

Re:What is the basis for the suit?

[BasilBrush]

Look more closely at the base. It's the shape of the Apple logo. For sure, that's Apple's most important trademark. And trademarks have to be protected.

Re:What is the basis for the suit?

[MachDelta]

If you follow enough links, it shows a snippit of the C&D email they received:

Unauthorized use of a person’s name and/or likeness constitutes a violation of California Civil Code Section 3344, which prohibits the use of any person’s name, photograph or likeness in a product without that person’s prior consent

Re:What is the basis for the suit?

[arisvega]

The t-shirt seller lost.

You expected Chuck Norris to lose?

I thought that this was decided

[Chrisq]

It looks like he has a case under Chinese law:

In the People's Republic of China, rights of personality are established by statute. according to article 99 and 100 of the General Principle of Civil Law of the People's Republic of China, the right of name and the right of image are protected. It is prohibited to use other's image for commercial use without the person's consent.

Personality Rights

[eldavojohn]

It falls under personality rights which varies country to country but in the United States it is proving to be a very dynamically changing landscape.

In reality this is probably just an annoyed Apple lawyer with too much time on his hand muscling a little guy into submission. They're foreign and can be made to look like leeches, I'm sure. The real kicker is that, as the lawyer on Techdirt mentions, there's no clear motive for this, is Apple making a competing figurine that they're losing sales on? Is the figurine somehow damaging to Mr. Jobs? If it's a parody of Steve Jobs doesn't that fall under fair use? So many questions but the answer will always be "Who has the most money and lawyers?" And that's Apple.

Re:Personality Rights

[BasilBrush]

It falls under straightforward trademark infringement for the shape of the base of the figurine.

bad likeness

[deathguppie]

I don't see how this even closely resembles Steve Jobs.. the head is waaay to small..

simple business

[Thud457]

Apple hates fun.

That's because GNU/fun is FOSS.
Apple prefers iFun(tm), which is under the BSD license.

In other news

[Locke2005]

Steve Balmer is insisting that Microsoft sue anybody making a figurine that looks like a complete asshole...