Constanza V. Seinfeld

Constanza v. Seinfeld

181 Misc. 2d 562, 693 N.Y.S. 2d 897

(Sup. Ct., N.Y. County 1999)

1. Parties:

Л Plaintiff: Michael Constanza.

Δ Defendants: Jerry Seinfeld, Larry David, National Broadcasting Company Inc., and the production companies.

2. Procedural history:

The issues came into the Court through a preanswer motion to dismiss.

3. Facts:

1.1. Δs used the name and likeness of the Л without his written consent to create a fictional character “George Constanza” in the television program “Seinfeld”.

1.2. Л claimed for being placed in a false light and invasion of privacy.

1.3. Л was seeking relief for violation of New York’s Civil Rights Law ᵴᵴ50 and 51.

4. Issues:

- Does the New York Law allow a claim for invasion of privacy?

- Do works of fiction fall within the scope of Section 50 of the Civil Rights Law, which prohibits the unauthorized use of a living’s person name or portrait for advertisement and trade purposes?

5. Holding:

No. The Court dismissed Л’s claims.

New York Law does not allow a claim for invasion of privacy, and according to section 50 of the New York Civil Rights Law works of fiction do not fall within the prohibition of use of a living’s person portrait or name.

6. Rule:

Section 50 of the New York Civil Rights Law (“the Statute”) prohibits the use of a living’s person name, portrait or picture for “advertising” or “trade” purposes without prior written consent. Section 50 provides criminal penalties and section 51 a private right of action for damages and injunctive relief.

7. Reasoning

The New York Law does not and never has allowed a common law claim for invasion of privacy. Howell v New York Post Co. 81 N.Y. 2d 115 (1993). Nevertheless, “the Statute” prohibits the unauthorized use of a living’s person name, portrait or picture for “advertising” or “trade” purposes.

In addition, as stated in Hampton v. Guare, 19 A.d. 2d 366 (1st Dept. 1993) “works of fiction and satire do no fall within the...