No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
‘You had me at “no capital gains tax on a disposal”’: legal and theoretical aspects of standalone image rights
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 January 2018
Abstract
This paper considers the provisions of the Guernsey image rights register, which came into being in 2012, alongside the image rights protections available in the EU Member States as revealed through a Commission-funded survey into the image rights of athletes. While it suggests several reasons for the limited popularity of the register and notes that the applicable regimes depend on whether violations are by third parties or by those with whom the performer is currently within a contractual relationship, it highlights the Guernsey scheme's potential benefits to performers, particularly in the field of tax planning, and makes suggestions as to how its relevance to them might be enhanced in the light of the Commission survey data and the applicable UK tax regime. By drawing on literature from masculinity and African-American studies especially, the paper also offers suggestions as to why performer endorsement is potentially so lucrative; but it also highlights some of the industry's negative effects and suggests that, while there is not a particular ‘problem’ of image rights violations within the Member States, discussions about the benefits of standalone image rights need to be informed by an awareness of these wider issues.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Society of Legal Scholars 2016
References
1. Romer, J and Storey, K ‘Image is everything! Guernsey registered image rights’ (2013) 24(2) Ent L Rev 51.Google Scholar
2. As revisited in Fenty v Arcadia Group [2015] 1 WLR 3291 CA.
3. Irvine v Talksport [2002] 1 WLR 2355 Ch, per Laddie J at 2369: ‘to succeed, the burden on the claimant includes a need to prove at least two, interrelated, facts. First, that at the time of the acts complained of he had a significant reputation or goodwill. Second, that the actions of the defendant gave rise to a false message which would be understood by a not insignificant section of his market that his goods have been endorsed, recommended or approved of by the claimant.’
4. See the leading common law case of Healan Laboratories v Topps Chewing Gum 202 F 2d 866 (2d Cir 1963) and, as a paradigm example of the statutory right, The California Civil Code, s 3344(a) of which provides that ‘any person who knowingly uses another's name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner, on or in products, merchandise, goods or services, without such person's prior consent, or, in the case of a minor, the prior consent of his parent or legal guardian, shall be liable for any damages sustained by the person or persons injured as a result thereof’.
5. Romer and Storey, above n 1, at 52.
6. Walsh, C ‘Are personality rights finally on the UK agenda?’ (2013) 35(5) Eur Intell Prop Rev 253.Google Scholar
7. Coin Controls Ltd v Suzo International (UK) Ltd [1999] Ch 33 at 43 per Laddie J; in the Guernsey context, see Healthspan Ltd v Healthy Direct Ltd 2003–2004 GLR 193.
8. N Brison and T Baker ‘“Jumpman” trademark woes: Michael Jordan v Qiaodan Sports’, paper presented at the Sport and Recreation Law Conference, New Orleans 2016, 27 February.
9. S Plaimondon ‘Air Jordan grounded in China’ 2015 The IP Law Blog 31 July, available at www.theiplawblog.com/2015/07-articles/trademark-law/air-jordan-grounded-in-china (accessed 23 June 2016).
10. Walsh, above n 6, at 260.
11. J Reichman ‘Universal minimum standards of intellectual property protection’ (1995) 29(2) Int'l Law 345.
12. See http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/esmmanual/esm2051.htm (accessed 23 June 2016).
13. G Dawes ‘A brief history of Guernsey law’ (2006) 10(1) Jersey L Rev 4.
14. See http://www.guernseylegalresources.gg/article/104749/Image-Rights-Bailiwick-of-Guernsey-Ordinance-2012 (accessed 23 June 2016).
15. E Gray ‘Guernsey: innovation in investment: image rights’ (2013) Mondaq 20 May, available at http://www.mondaq.com/x/239784/Trademark/Innovation+In+Investment+Image+Rights (accessed 23 June 2016).
16. J Nurton ‘Island for IP’ (2006) 161 Managing Intell Prop 17.
17. See http://ipo.guernseyregistry.com (accessed 23 June 2016).
18. D Farnsworth and A Kelham ‘Guernsey image rights’ Lewis Silkin Brief, available at http://www.lewissilkin.com/Knowledge/2013/September/~/media/Knowledge%20PDFs/MBT/Guernsey%20Image%20Rights.ashx (accessed 23 June 2016).
19. The Image Rights (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Ordinance 2012, s 1(1).
20. For unclear reasons, the Ordinance spells ‘personage’ in French.
21. Ibid, s 3.
22. On the powers and duties of the agent, see ibid, ss 96–101.
23. The Image Rights (Bailiwick of Guernsey) Regulations 2012, SI 2012/55, available at http://www.guernseylegalresources.gg/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=79805&p=0 (accessed 23 June 2016).
24. Ibid, Reg 5(4)(a), 5.
25. Ibid, Reg 5(4)(b).
26. Ibid, Reg 5(6).
27. Ibid, Reg 5(4)(d).
28. See http://ipo.guernseyregistry.com/article/104762/Image-Rights-Forms--Fees (accessed 23 June 2016).
29. I Blackshaw ‘Face: off’ (2011) 108 Eur Law 28.
30. G Dawes ‘Reciprocal enforcement – High Court enforcement of County Court judgment’ (2010) 14(1) Jersey & Guernsey L Rev 90 (discussing the Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) (Guernsey) Law 1957).
31. B Hugenholdz et al Study on Sports Organisers’ Rights in the European Union (Luxembourg: EU Publications Office, 2014). The data is discussed with the permission of the European Commission.
32. J Gerring ‘What is a case study and what is it good for?’ (2004) 98(2) Am Pol Sci Rev 341.
33. Ibid, at 342.
34. H Xanthaki ‘Legal transplants in legislation: defusing the trap’ (2008) 57(3) Int'l & Comp L Q 659 at 671.
35. This phrase was added because in Croatia, for example, professional footballers are not employees of the club for which they play.
36. G Black ‘Publicity and image rights in Scots law’ (2010) 14(3) Edinb L Rev 364 at 366.
37. Above n 16, at s 3(1): ‘Image’ means (a) the name of a personage or any other name by which a personage is known; (b) the voice, signature, likeness, appearance, silhouette, feature, face, expressions (verbal or facial), gestures, mannerisms and any other distinctive characteristic or personal attribute of a personage; or (c) any photograph, illustration, image, picture, moving image or electronic or other representation (‘picture’) of a personage and of no other person, except to the extent that the other person is not identified or singled out in or in connection with the use of the picture.
38. Black, above n 35, at 367.
39. Per Laddie, J in Irvine v Talksport [2002] 1 WLR 2355 at 2359.
40. [2015] 1 WLR 3291, CA.
41. J Liu ’Sports merchandising, publicity rights and the missing role of the sports fan (2011) 52(2) BC L Rev 493.
42. B Walliser ‘An international review of sponsorship research (2003) 22(1) Int'l J Advert 5 at 9.
43. Irvine, above n 39, at 2371.
44. Decision of the Audacia Provincial de Barcelona, AC/2006/1955, May 2006.
45. Rechtbank Utrecht, 30 November 2011, 289895/HA ZA 10-1563.
46. Hautamski, 756/61/04, 11 November 2004.
47. Lietuvos Respublikos Seimas, Art 2.22.
48. The Supreme Court of Lithuania, 24 February 2003, Case No 3K-3-294/2003.
49. D McArdle Dispute Resolution in Sport: Athletes, Law and Arbitration (London: Routledge, 2015).
50. Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Poland and Portugal (in addition to Spain).
51. Royal Decree 1006/1985 26 June, ‘regulating the special employment relations of professional sportspeople’.
52. [1996] 1 CMLR 45.
53. European Commission White Paper on Sport, Com (2007) 391 Final (Brussels: European Commission, 2007).
54. A Koukiadaki ‘The evolution of employee involvement in European labour law’ (2011) 11(4) ERA Forum 601.
55. TFEU Art 153(1) provides that ‘with a view to achieving the objectives of Article 151, the Union shall support and complement the activities of the Member States in … (b) working conditions’/
56. France, Greece, Hungary, Portugal, Romania, Spain and Poland.
57. Act I of 2004 on Sport.
58. S Kustec Lipicer and D McArdle ‘National law, domestic governance and global policy’ (2014) 6(1) Int'l J Sports Pol'y & Pol 71 at 74.
59. At Art 35.
60. Act IV of the Hungarian Civil Code 1959. An unofficial English version is available at http://www.lawandtranslation.com/szolgaltatasaink/jogszabalyok/1959evi4 (accessed 23 June 2016).
61. Austria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Poland, Spain and Sweden.
62. The exceptions were Austria, Denmark, France, Malta, Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK.
63. Allgemeines Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch.
64. Ibid, §16.
65. MA 2412, Austrian Supreme Court, March 2003.
66. Urheberrechtsgesetz (UrhG), as amended.
67. See, for example, the proposals to repeal dividend tax credit in the Finance Bill 2016: www.gov.uk/government/publications/finance-bill-2016-draft-legislation-overview-documents/overview-of-legislation-in-draft (accessed 23 June 2016).
68. P Shackleton, ‘Taxation of sports people in the UK’ (2010) 1017 Tax J 14; R Cloete ‘The taxation of image rights: a comparative analysis’ (2012) 45(3) De Jure 556–567; A Craggs and N Mellors ‘Getting physical – how the taxman is tackling image rights’ (2011) 2(6) Ent L Rev 175.
69. Pursuant to the Income tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003.
70. See https://www.gov.uk/capital-gains-tax/overview (accessed 23 June 2016).
71. See http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/esmmanual/esm2051.htm (accessed 23 June 2016).
72. Social Security Contributions (Intermediaries) Regulations 2000, SI 2000/727; 2003/2079.
73. HMRC IR35: Find Out If It Applies (London: HMRC, 2014).
74. A ‘Managed Service Company Provider’ as defined in ESM3515: www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/esmmanual/ESM3515.htm (accessed 23 June 2016).
75. Introduced by the Social Security Contributions (Managed Service Companies) Regulations 2007, SI 2007/2070.
76. C Vokes and P Hirsch ‘Income tax for professional athletes and artists – a cross-border story’ Tax Law Commission Conference (2015) September, available at http://london.aija.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/National-report-UK.pdf (accessed 23 June 2016).
77. In tax year 2016–2017, the income tax rate will be 40% on higher rate earnings between £31,786 and £150,000, and 45% on additional rate earnings above £150,000: HMRC (2015) Tax and Credit Rates and Thresholds for 2016-17, available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tax-and-tax-credit-rates-and-thresholds-for-2016-17/tax-and-tax-credit-rates-and-thresholds-for-2016-17#bands-of-taxable-income-and-corresponding-tax-rates (accessed 8 March 2016).
78. J Lindholm ‘The problems with salary caps under EU law’ (2011) 12(2) Tex Rev Ent & Sports L 189.
79. Wayne Rooney allegedly earns £200,000 a week (http://www.whatfootballersearn.com/player/wayne-rooney/, accessed 23 June 2016), but in team sports other than football even the best players earn less than half that figure a year. For example, in 2013 the base salary cap for entire squads in the highest tier of rugby league – the English Super League – was £1.65 million: Mason v Huddersfield Giants 2014 WL 3925309; L O'Leary ‘Regulating against player movement in professional rugby league’ (2009) 3(4) Int'l Sports L J 3.
80. [2000] STC (SCD) 443. The authors Evelyn Waugh and Jocelyn Brooke were contemporaries. One was touched by greatness; the other was better than many people gave him credit for. This may or may not be relevant.
81. J Norman ‘Bergkamp's legacy has opened the image rights floodgates’ (London: Sportspro Media, 2011), available at http://www.sportspromedia.com/guest_blog/bergkamps_legacy_has_opened_the_image_rights_floodgates (accessed 23 June 2016).
82. P Kelso ‘Premier league sides forced to pay back millions’ (2012) The Telegraph 15 February.
83. [2011] BCC 149 (Ch), para H5.
84. Ibid, para 87.
85. Fenty, above n 2, at 3299.
86. M Chandler ‘Taxation of image rights: recent developments’ (2015) Mills & Reeve, 1 May, available at www.mills-reeve.com/taxation-of-image-rights-recent-developments (accessed 23 June 2016).
87. A Miller ‘HMRC aims to give football clubs a good kicking’ (2012) Sporting Intelligence 13 January, available at http://www.sportingintelligence.com/2012/01/13/hmrc-aim-to-give-elite-football-“a-good-kicking”-on-tax-after-evasion-tip-off-130101 (accessed 23 June 2016).
88. Murray Group Holdings Ltd v Revenue and Tax Commissioners [2015] SLT 765.
89. Department for Culture, Media and Sport Expert Working Group on Football Supporter Ownership and Engagement (London: DCMS, 2015), available at www.gov.uk/dcms (accessed 23 June 2016).Google Scholar
90. HMRC CG68435 – Intellectual Property Rights: Image Rights in Foreign Jurisdictions, available at http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/CGmanual/cg68435.htm (accessed 23 June 2016); F Huxtable ‘Image is everything’ (2015) Taxation 15 February, available at http://www.taxation.co.uk/taxation/Articles/2015/02/17/332699/image-everything (accessed 23 June 2016).
91. Basketball star LeBron James signed a $30 million endorsement deal with Nike before he signed his first professional contract: http://uk.businessinsider.com/nike-gave-lebron-james-a-lifetime-shoe-deal-2015-12?r=US&IR=T (accessed 23 June 2016).
92. See http://www.athletepromotions.com/blog/tag/dennis-rodman-endorsements/ (accessed 23 June 2016).
93. See http://www.georgeforeman.co.uk (accessed 23 June 2016).
94. Irvine v Talksport [2002] 1 WLR 2355, at 2368 per Laddie J.
95. Fenty, above n 2, at 3294.
96. Ibid, at 3299.
97. S Fletcher and J Mitchell ‘Court of Appeal found no love for Topshop tank’ (2015) 37(6) Eur Intell Prop Rev 394 at 397.
98. See http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/up_and_coming_watson_benefits_from_cosmetic_deal (accessed 23 June 2016).
99. See http://www.forbes.com/profile/maria-sharapova/ (accessed 23 June 2016). Prior to her doping infraction being announced in March 2016, Sharapova had been the highest-grossing female athlete for over a decade. But her value of $24 million placed her only 34th in the global list, far behind the $105 million earned by the wife-beater and boxer Floyd Mayweather: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2014/08/12/the-worlds-highest-paid-female-athletes-2014/ (accessed 23 June 2016).
100. Williams, R Problems in Materialism and Culture (London: Verso, 1980) p 185.Google Scholar
101. D Pompper ‘Masculinities, the metrosexual and media images’ (2010) 63(9) Sex Roles: J Res 682 at 684.
102. R Connell and J Messerschmidt ‘Hegemonic masculinity: rethinking the concept’ (2005) 19(6) Gender & Soc'y 829 at 830.
103. M Labre ‘The male body ideal: perspectives of readers and non-readers of fitness magazines’ (2013) 2(2) J Men's Health & Gender 223.
104. Fenty, above n 2, at 3308.
105. Pronger, B Body Fascism (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
106. R Gill, K Henwood and C McLean ‘Body projects and the regulation of normative masculinity’ (2005) 11(1) Body & Soc'y 37, 40.
107. ‘Marissa, who is married to a pro bodybuilder, has a background in dance and competitive cheerleading … let's uncover a bit more about this buff beauty.’ S Neveux ‘Hardbody Marissa Rivero McGrath’ (2015) Ironman Magazine August, available (if you really must) at http://www.ironmanmagazine.com/hardbody-marissa-rivero-mcgrath/ (accessed 23 June 2016).
108. Pompper, above n 101, at 683.
109. M Tugenhadt ‘Exploitation of image rights in the UK’ (2003) available at http://fbis.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/2002-exploitation-of-image-rights-in-the-uk-by-michael-tugenhadt-qc.pdf (accessed 23 June 2016).