|
1710 REVIEW GRANTED The First Amendment protects recreational works just as it does political expression; if a film is an obvious work of fiction, a few similarities between the name and attributes of a character in it and those of the plaintiff are not sufficient to result in liability for invasion of privacy by appropriation of identity.CitationPOLYDOROS v TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX (Sandlot) 57 CA4 795 [See: CivC 3344; Eastwood v Superior Court 149 CA3 409; Aguilar v Universal 174 CA3 384; Peo ex rel Maggio v Scribner's 130 NYS2 514; Time v Hill 385 US 374; Burstyn v Wilson 343 US 495; Guglielmi v Spelling 25 C3 860]
|
|
