I recently watched a Milwaukee Brewers game, and noticed that the team’s mascot has a mustache that strinkingly resembles the one that sits atop Hall of Fame reliever Rollie Fringers’ upper lip.
Except this one is blonde. Is it possible Rollie Fingers denied the Brewers the an opportunity to use his image, and that a blonde version was the next best thing?
And further, what body of law is it that deals with the matter of a public figure “owning” his image, and being able to deny consent to another who wants to use that image? I am not denying that such a legal doctrine exists, nor do I seek to debate whether it should. I just want to know what it is called.
I doubt seriously that Bernie Brewer’s handlebar moustache is enough for Rollie Fingers to sue the Brewers for violating his rights.
IMO, Tony Twist had a much better case and he lost his suit against Spawn and Todd MacFarlane.
Thankyou, Dooku. I didn’t even know the mascot’s name, but thanks to the infromation you provided, I was able to find out he was with the team years before Fingers joined. And his mustache is probably not as curly.
I would still like to hear input people might have about the matter of owning one’s image. Both the Michael Jordan/video game question here on GQ, and the Lady Di/Franklin Mint Affair have made me interested in the topic.