Katherine Heigl Case Study

1) As a famous person, what sort of Intellectual Property or other protection does Katherine Heigl want?

Katherine Heigl would want to trademark her foundations such as the Heigl Foundation’s Networking Program, Jason Debus Heigl Foundation, and the Heigl Hounds of Hope which identify the types of business she conducts . She would also secure a copyright on her production company which is geared towards her artistic work. Since Heigl is a well known public figure, being the entertainer she is, she would need protection against false and defamatory statements that are made with actual malice. This includes false endorsements and false publicity which is known of its falsity. The tort, invasion of privacy under the common law, safeguards …show more content…
IOP is their initial offering to the public and any investors out there interested in investing in that public corporation. One advantage of public corporations is that they can use their investments to expand and buy more equipment if needed. They can also use the money to raise more capital. That being said, there is no limit on the amount of shareholders who can invest in the corporation, they can have hundred of thousands of investors to help raise capital. As a limited liability corporation, the shareholders are not liable for anything other than their set amount of investment to the corporation. That means that if the corporation is sued, the shareholders will not be liable for any damages, just for their investment in the corporation. Stakeholder involvement is another factor of a public corporation. Stakeholder involvement is about engaging all of the people involved with the business, including employees, shareholders, managers and the community at …show more content…
The New York Civil Rights Law, Sections 50 and 51, deals with misappropriation of a name or picture without permission for advertising purposes, which is the appropriate law related to this case. Heigl also sued under common law, claiming unfair competition, for misappropriating the picture from JustJared, and for using it out of context to create a false endorsement. Additionally, under tort law, she may have a legitimate claim against duane reade in regards to invasion of privacy, fraudulent misrepresentation, and (not very likely, but possibly) Libel Defamation. Her privacy was invaded because Duane Reade did not have permission to use the photo, this is related to privacy because she may not have wanted anyone to know that she shopped there. Even though she chose to go into this public place, she did not intend to become an advertisement, thus we have fraudulent misrepresentation. Libel Defamation is related to public figures, Katherine Heigl is a well known actress, but not a politician of any kind, this is why Libel defamation may not be relevant in this case. It is possible, however, that a certain producer is strictly and morally against Duane Reade’s business for some reason, and chooses not to hire Katherine for an acting part based on her apparent association with his business, in this case Duane Reade may be sued for impeding Ms. Heigl’s ability to provide for