Duke Law School shield Duke Law & Technology Review logo
TOPICS
eCommerce
eDiscovery
CyberCrime
International
Media & Comm.
Patents & Tech.
Health & Biotech.
Copyrights & TM.
 
DLTR Home
About DLTR
Contact DLTR
Submissions
Staff
Duke Law
eCommerce:
RECENT ARTICLES:
ONLINE FANTASY SPORTS LITIGATION AND THE NEED FOR A FEDERAL RIGHT OF PUBLICITY STATUTE
  2010 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 002
eCommerce
02/09/2010
The right of publicity is currently a jumble of state common law and state statutes, but the online fantasy sports industry crosses state lines with ease. Having witnessed the great revenue potential of online fantasy sports, professional sports leagues are trying to strong-arm independent fantasy sports providers out of the business by using the right of publicity to assert property interests in the statistics generated by professional players, and used by fantasy sports providers to run their online games. The first such attempt--by Major League Baseball--failed. However, the state law nature of the right of publicity prevents any single court opinion from binding the industry or other jurisdictions. The National Football League is attempting to achieve a more favorable result in a different jurisdiction. If successful, other professional sports leagues will be encouraged to litigate the issue, and Major League Baseball might even attempt to re-litigate its position in other states. This free-for-all could result in different rules for different sports in different states, which would not only be untenable for the online fantasy sports providers, but a violation of the Constitution as well. A cohesive federal right of publicity statute would (1) bring uniformity to the doctrine, (2) give federal courts (where these actions are being brought) a federal law to apply instead of allowing them to continue muddying the application of state laws, (3) directly address First Amendment concerns, and (4) solve the dormant commerce clause violation alluded to above.


Archived Articles >>>

Title:

Date Posted
HE U.S. ON TILT: WHY THE UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT ACT IS A BAD BET 06/30/2008
WHERE WILL CONSUMERS FIND PRIVACY PROTECTION FROM RFIDS?: A CASE FOR FEDERAL LEGISLATION 3/08/2007
INTERNET SALES TAXES FROM BORDERS TO AMAZON: HOW LONG BEFORE ALL OF YOUR PURCHASES ARE TAXED?2/13/2006
ANTI-EMPLOYER BLOGGING: EMPLOYEE BREACH OF THE DUTY OF LOYALTY AND THE PROCEDURE FOR ALLOWING DISCOVERY OF A BLOGGER'S IDENTITY BEFORE SERVICE OF PROCESS IS EFFECTED1/17/2006
CODDLING SPIES: WHY THE LAW DOESN'T ADEQUATELY ADDRESS COMPUTER SPYWARE11/16/2005
WHEN BIG BROTHER PRIVATIZES: COMMERCIAL SURVEILLANCE, THE PRIVACY ACT OF 1974, AND THE FUTURE OF RFID8/31/2005
STOP THE ABUSE OF GMAIL!5/16/2005
CANNING SPAM: CONSUMER PROTECTION OR A LID ON FREE SPEECH?12/21/2004
1984 IS STILL FICTION: ELECTRONIC MONITORING IN THE WORKPLACE AND U.S. PRIVACY LAW12/1/2004
PRIVACY, FREE SPEECH & THE GARDEN GROVE CYBER CAFÉ EXPERIMENT10/15/2004
VIRTUAL SHAREHOLDER MEETINGS9/1/2004
RESTORING A PUBLIC INTEREST VISION OF LAW IN THE AGE OF THE INTERNET6/23/2004
ONLINE DEFAMATION: BRINGING THE COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT OF 1996 IN LINE WITH SOUND PUBLIC POLICY10/6/2003
THE PENDING DETERMINATION OF THE LEGALITY OF INTERNET GAMBLING IN THE UNITED STATES7/11/2003
CAN THE INTERNET KILL? HOLDING WEB INVESTIGATORS LIABLE FOR THEIR CRIMINAL CUSTOMERS5/6/2003
THE E-GOVERNMENT ACT: PROMOTING E-QUALITY OR EXAGGERATING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE?4/15/2003
THE PROS AND CONS OF ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION: AN ASSESSMENT OF CYBER-MEDIATION WEBSITES2/18/2003
MOM & POP V. DOT-COM: A DISPARITY IN TAXATION BASED ON HOW YOU SHOP?12/19/2002
ONLINE BROKERS AND THE SEC: STILL WORKING OUT THE GLITCHES11/6/2002
THE INTERNET OPENS ITS DOORS FOR .BIZ- NESS9/27/2001
ARE DOMAIN NAMES PROPERTY? THE SEX.COM CONTROVERSY9/10/2001
MONITORING EMPLOYEE E-MAIL: EFFICIENT WORKPLACES VS. EMPLOYEE PRIVACY7/25/2001
THE COMPLEXITIES OF ON-LINE MUTUAL FUND ADVERTISING: A SUMMARY OF THE RELEVANT REGULATIONS6/4/2001
SOFTWARE DISCLOSURE AND LIABILITY UNDER THE SECURITIES ACTS5/10/2001
FTC VS. TOYSMART3/26/2001
ARE ONLINE BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS EXECUTED BY ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES LEGALLY BINDING?2/28/2001
Search:
Related Sites: