Parks v. Laface Records

329 F.3d 437 (6th Cir. 2003)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P is a civil rights icon. Her single act of defiance has garnered her numerous public accolades and awards, and she has used that celebrity status to promote various civil and human rights causes as well as television programs and books inspired by her life story. She has also approved a collection of gospel recordings by various artists. Ds are OutKast, comprised of recording artists Andre 'Dre' Benjamin and Antwan 'Big Boi' Patton; their record producers, LaFace, founded by and named after Antonio 'L.A.' Reid and Kenny 'Babyface' Edmonds; and LaFace's record distributors, Arista Records and BMG Entertainment (Ds). Ds released the album Aquemini. The album's first single release was a song titled Rosa Parks, described as a 'hit single' by a sticker on the album. The same sticker that contained the name Rosa Parks also contained a Parental Advisory warning of 'explicit content. P sued Ds for using her name as the title of their song, Rosa Parks. P made her claim for false advertising under § 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), and for intrusion on her common law right of publicity under Michigan state law. P brought this action in a Michigan state court. D removed the case to the District Court. The parties entered into a stipulation of the facts and both filed motions for summary judgment. Applying the Rogers v. Grimaldi test, the district court concluded that the First Amendment, as a matter of law, was a defense to P's Lanham Act and right of publicity claims. The court found there was no explicit representation that the work was endorsed by P, there was no obvious relationship between the content of the song and its title, there was no consumer confusion from the presentation and if there was Ds’ first amendment rights prevailed. It granted Ds’ motion and P appealed.