A Right of Personality for the UK: A comprehensive study of its significance, rationality, and its impacts on UK celebrities
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The English legal system currently does not recognise a right of personality, nor does it confer any exclusive rights in a celebrity’s name, image, likeness or identity. Absent such rights, protection against unauthorised exploitations of celebrity personality is only piecemeal, in that, the English courts ‘stretch’ the existing legal doctrines to remedy such misuses. The tort of passing off has been stretched the most in this regard, but owing to its requirement of misrepresentation, even the obvious cases of persona misappropriation could not be accommodated. Even privacy-based tort of breach of confidence was invoked, but privacy could not form the basis of protection as the object of protection under privacy is fundamentally different from that of under personality. The established IP rights, like trademarks and copyrights, were also applied, but it failed to deliver, since none of these principles were originally designed to accommodate personality claims. Such inadequacy and ineffectiveness of the available legal remedies have created a ‘lacunae’ in the English law, as the system is failing to provide the celebrities their desired levels of protection or any at all. The thesis addresses this lacunae in law and advocates that the only solution lies in adopting a distinct right of personality in the system. Proposing so is both pragmatic and practicable since such rights can only remedy personality misappropriation, and most importantly, adoption of such rights have provided the necessary solution in many other legal systems around the world. This thesis conducts a thorough analysis of the rationales that commonly underlies such personality rights and by evaluating the views of both proponents and opponents, constructs the legal foundation/basis of the right. A comparative study of ten (10) jurisdictions, combining both common-law states (like USA, Canada, etc.) and civil law states (like Germany, France, Italy, etc) is also conducted and based on the experience and practice of such compared states, potential models for a right of personality have been recommended in this thesis as the solution. The models recommended are designed to meet the modern realities of persona exploitation and is influenced by the current English IP regimes and the international jurisprudence available on personality rights. The proposed models are also designed with an in-built check and balance mechanism so that any monopolistic application of the right can be minimised and competing rights of free speech and/or public interest, if any, in the impugned exploitation are not undermined.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».