In what way did the case of White v. Samsung Electronics seem to extend the scope of the appropriation tort? How is the environment for commercial speech a bit more dangerous following White?
What will be an ideal response?
[The appellate court held that Vanna White could sue even though it was not her actual picture used in the advertisement and even though consumers would not mistake the robot for Vanna. The ad nevertheless capitalized on Vanna White's image, the court said, and that was enough to support a lawsuit for appropriation; consumers might assume Vanna White was connected with Samsung in some way.]
You might also like to view...
Our general understanding of value is that it is a mode of thought that can influence
the way we think about things and about the behaviors in which we engage. What do we do in this "value-thinking mode"? (a) We isolate a particular value that seems to apply to the "something" that is the value object of a proposition. (b) We make subjective, judgmental statements about people, places, ideas, and artifacts. (c) We describe the nature and extensiveness of a disparity. (d) We test a hypothesis that derives from a moral or ethical position.
Miranda and her new roommate, Rosa, don’t seem to get along. Rosa thinks of Miranda negatively and treats her as such by avoiding her. Miranda notices the cold treatment from Rosa and starts to view herself as a bad person and roommate because of it. This demonstrates how what two concepts are intertwined?
a. communication and reaction b. perception identity c. individuality and misrepresentation d. definition and interpretation