Source: http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/indiana-right-publicity-law
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 02:46:16+00:00

Document:
This page covers legal information specific to the State of Indiana. For more general information, see the Legal Guide page on Using the Name or Likeness of Another; for other states, see State Law: Right of Publicity.
Indiana has two systems of right of publicity law: a statutory right protecting a property interest, and a common law privacy right.
Indiana codifies its statutory right of publicity in Ind. Code § 32-36-1. You should first familiarize yourself with the statute.
Indiana’s right of publicity statute protects against the use of these protected aspects “for a commercial purpose” during the personality’s lifetime and after death. The right of publicity lasts for 100 years after the death of the individual and applies to those who died before the statute’s enactment in 1994.
on or in connection with a product, merchandise, goods, services, or commercial activities.
for advertising or soliciting purchases of products, merchandise, goods, services, or for promoting commercial activities.
The term “name” means “the actual or assumed name of a living or deceased natural person that is intended to identify the person.” Ind. Code § 32-36-1-3. As a result, the statute would apply to performers’ stage names as well as their birth names.
Who Can Exercise the Statutory Right of Publicity?
operation of the applicable state laws of intestate succession.
Ind. Code § 32-36-1-16. If, after death, a personality’s rights have not been transferred by one of the above means and he or she has no survivors, any rights that have not been vested are terminated. A personality or a person to whom the recognized rights of a personality have been transferred may bring action under the statute. Ind. Code § 32-36-1-17.
What Constitutes a Statutory Violation?
knowingly causes advertising or promotional material created or used in violation of the statute to be published, distributed, exhibited, or disseminated within Indiana.
Indiana common law recognizes an invasion of privacy claim for misappropriation of an individual’s name or likeness, with the Indiana Supreme Court noting that the tort focuses on an individual’s right to be left alone. Doe v. Methodist Hospital, 690 N.E.2d 681, 684 (Ind. 1997). A person’s name or likeness “embraces the concept of a person's character, which is legally protected against appropriation by another for his own use or benefit.” Felsher v. University of Evansville, 755 N.E.2d 589, 601 (Ind. 2001). For these reasons, a person can likely assert the common law right without evidence that their name, etc., has any particular commercial value.
In Doe, the Court defined the tort of invasion of privacy as the “unwarranted appropriation or exploitation of one's personality . . . in such a manner as to outrage or cause mental suffering, shame, or humiliation to a person of ordinary sensibilit[ies].” Doe, 690 N.E.2d at 685–6.
Although “an appropriation claim involves a privacy issue in the nature of a property right,” because the tort protects a right of privacy, this cause of action cannot be brought by a corporation. Felsher, 755 N.E.2d at 593–4.
What Constitutes a Violation of the Common Law Right?
Indiana courts have adopted the elements for misappropriation from the Restatement (Second) of Torts. Therefore, “an appropriation and use of a plaintiff’s name or likeness occurs whenever the defendant ‘makes use of the plaintiff's name or likeness for his own purposes or benefit, even though the use is not a commercial one, and even though the benefit sought to be obtained is not a pecuniary one.’” Felsher v. University of Evansville, 727 N.E.2d 783 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (rev’d on other grounds) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 652I cmt. B (1977)).
In Felsher, the Indiana Supreme Court found that a professor had misappropriated the names and likenesses of the University of Evansville and university employees when he created websites and email addresses containing the plaintiffs’ names and used them “for the sole purpose of harming the [plaintiffs’] reputation[s].” 755 N.E.2d at 597. The Court held that the misappropriation was for the professor’s benefit because it “enabled him to pursue a personal vendetta.” Id. at 600. The Indiana Appeals Court has also noted that the unauthorized use of photographs of a person for commercial purposes is generally actionable as an invasion of privacy. Continental Optical Co v. Reed, 86 N.E.2d 306 (Ind. Ct. App. 1949).
impoundment, destruction or other disposition of violating goods or items from which violating goods could be reproduced or manufactured.
Indiana’s statute explicitly states that the above remedies are supplemental to any other remedies provided by law. Ind. Code § 32-36-1-20.
Under Indiana law, damages for an invasion of privacy claim can include, but are not confined to, “compensation for the embarrassment, humiliation and mental pain [that] a person of ordinary sensibilities would have suffered under the circumstances.” Continental Optical, 86 N.E.2d at 309. Indiana law also allows for special damages that naturally flow from the tort as well as injunctive relief. Id. at 309–10; Felsher, 755 N.E.2d at 599–601.
literary works, theatrical works, musical compositions, film, radio, or television programs.
advertisements for the above uses.
a protected aspect if that aspect has commercial value only because of the personality’s criminal charge or conviction.
In Time, Inc. v. Sand Creek Partners, L.P., a federal district court stated that “[i]n general, when a person's picture is used to illustrate a non-commercial, newsworthy article, his interest in the use of his likeness or image must be evaluated in light of constitutional interests found in the First Amendment.” 825 F. Supp. 210, 212 (S.D. Ind. 1993). In Time, after broadly construing “newsworthiness,” the court held that the photographs of two widely known celebrities on their wedding way illustrated a newsworthy event of widespread public interest; therefore, the newsworthiness that the images depicted outweighed any privacy rights of the celebrities. Id. at 212–13.
The Indiana Appeals Court recognized that the right of privacy can be waived. Continental Optical, 86 N.E.2d at 309. In Continental Optical, the court noted that the right is waived by consent, either express or implied, and may also be relinquished by an individual who “enters a business or calling which gives the public a legitimate interest in his character, activities and affairs.” Id.
A common law claim for misappropriation is subject to a two-year statute of limitations. Ind. Code § 34-11-2-4 (stating that an action for injury to person or character must be brought within two years); Johnson v. Blackwell, 885 N.E.2d 25 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (applying a two-year statute of limitations to an invasion of privacy claim). A two-year statute of limitations would also likely apply to statutory right of publicity claims. Ind. Code § 34-11-2-4 (stating that an action for injury to personal property must be brought within two years).

References: § 32
 § 32
 § 32
 § 32
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 652
 v. 
 § 32
 v. 
 § 34
 v. 
 § 34