Strouse was the president and CEO of a company but departed with the company was sold. He did not approve of how the new company continued to use YouTube videos Strouse had made when he was with the company. So Strouse sued under Pennsylvania law for unauthorized use of his name and likeness. The company moved to dismiss the claim and the court granted the motion.
There are three elements to a claim for unauthorized use of name and likeness under Pennsylvania law:
- a natural person’s name or likeness must have commercial value;
- the accused party must make an unauthorized use of that name or likeness; and
- the use is for commercial or advertising purposes.
The court found that Strouse’s claim failed on the first and second elements.
Although he claimed he suffered substantial damages due to the company’s supposed misappropriation, the court found he offered no explanation for how or why these damages occurred. He did not allege that his name had any special reputation or prestige such that mention of his name or use of his image in a video on the company’s website could confer an actionable benefit.
And the court found that Strouse’s pleadings did not establish that the company was using the videos without authorization. Strouse had made the videos as president and CEO of the company – he certainly authorized such use then. The acquiring company purchased the business’s assets, including the videos that were made.
Wurth Baer Supply Co. v. Strouse, 2022 WL 4125802 (M.D. Pennsylvania, September 9, 2022)
See also: