Heavy Artillery Isn’t Always The Solution

1999-01-01

HEAVYARTILLERYISN’TALWAYSTHESOLUTIONPUBLICITYRIGHTAND
COPYRIGHTACTIONBEFORETHEQUEBECSUPERIORCOURT

by
HuguesG.Richard*
LEGERROBICRICHARD,Lawyers
ROBIC,Patent&TrademarkAgents
CentreCDPCapital
1001Square-Victoria-BlocE–8
thFloor
Montreal,Quebec,CanadaH2Z2B7
Tel.:(514)9876242-Fax:(514)8457874
www.robic.ca-info@robic.com

TheSuperiorCourtoftheprovinceofQuebec
1hasrecentlyremindedthe
Plaintiffsinanactionforbreachofcopyrightandpersonalityright,thatheavy
artilleryisnotalwaysthebestsolution.Restrainandout-of-courtsettlement
maybebetteralternatives.
YvonÉthierisawell-knownartistintheprovinceofQuebec,heusesthename
PatrickNormanaspseudonym.Heandhismanagerwereseekinga
permanentinjunctionenjoiningBoutiqueàCoifferTonicInc.(TONIC)and
CommunicationsVoirInc.(VOIR)fromusinghisphotographyinassociation
withpromotionofTONIC’sservicesandproducts.Theywerealsoaskingfor
theissuanceofanorderagainsttheDefendantsenjoiningthemtopublishat
theirowncostacopyofthejudgmenttointervenewithinten(10)ofitsissue.
ThePlaintiffswerealsorequestingthefollowingmonetaryreliefs:
1.$50,000.00asliquidateddamagesandinterestsforcommercialuseof
PatrickNorman’simageinassociationwithTONIC’sproducts;
2.$250,000.00asliquidateddamagesandinterestsforprejudicetothe
honourandreputationofthePlaintiffsand,
3.$50,000.00forexemplarypunitivedamagesforintentionalbreachofthe
fundamentalrightsofthePlaintiffsinthecommercialexploitationofPatrick
Norman’simage.

LEGERROBICRICHARD,1994-2003.*OfthelawfirmLEGERROBICRICHARD,g.p.andofthepatent&trademarkagencyfirm
ROBIC,g.p.
1YvonÉthier(alsoknownasPatrickNorman)andDiCesareManagementInc.v.Boutiqueà
CoifferTonicInc.andCommunicationsVoirInc.,CourtCaseNo.500-05-005529-944,dated
December21,1998,notyetreportedbutcanbeobtainedat:http://rejb.cedrom-sni.qc.ca,
REJB98-10030.

AllofthisturmoilwascausedbythefactthatahairdressersaloncalledTONIC
publishedinanewspaperentitledVOIRaonethirdpageadshowingPatrick
Norman’sphotographywiththewords:”Problemwithyourlook!Here’sthe
solution”.ThisphotographywastakenfromaLPalbumofPatrickNorman
datingbacktothe1970’s.
ThePlaintiffsarguedthattheDefendantshaveappropriatedforthemselves
withoutauthorizationareputationbuiltthroughhardworkandinvestmentin
ordertopromotetheirproductsandbusiness.ThisappropriationofPatrick
Norman’simage,theyalleged,prejudicedhishonourandreputation,andthe
use,mutilationandpublicationofPatrickNorman’sphotographyinfringedhis
copyrightinthephotography.
TheCourtheldthatPatrickNormanhadnocopyrightinhisphotography.The
photographywastheworkofaphotographercalledBenoîtLevacwhowas
employedbyProjet-SpecInc.,acompanycontrolledbyPatrickNorman.But
thecompanywentbankruptandtherewasnoevidenceofanywritten
assignmentbetweenthetrusteeinbankruptcyandPatrickNorman.
Therefore,hecouldnotclaimanyinterestinthesaidcopyright.
TheCourtthenwentontoanalyzewhetherthenewspaperVOIRhad
committedanyfaultbypublishingtheimpugnedadvertisement.The
evidenceshowedthattheadrespectedthegeneralrulesrecognizedinthe
publicityindustry.Itwasnotsexist,racistnorviolent,itdidnotbreachanyof
thefundamentalrightsrecognizedbytheCanadianandQuebecChartersof
Rights.Accordingtothepublisher,itisimpossibleforanewspapersuchas
VOIRtoverifyifeverypersonwhosephotographyappearsonan
advertisementhasgivenhisorherauthorization.TheCourtfoundthatthe
newspaperhadnoobligationtoverifyifPatrickNormanhadauthorizedthe
useofhisphotography.Therefore,theDefendant’snewspapercommittedno
fault.
TONIC,ontheotherhand,acknowledgedthatitdidcommitafault.Thiswas
recognizedearlyon.TONICevenpublishedanadexpressingitsexcusesto
PatrickNormanonthesamepageofthesamenewspaperwiththesamesize
ad.
Withrespecttoexemplarypunitivedamages,theCourtfoundthatifany
wereowing,itwouldhavetobeundertheQuebecCharterofRightssince
theCopyrightActhadnoapplication.However,theCourtfoundthatTONIC
didnotintentionallybreachthePlaintiffs’rights.Theintentionwastomakea
joke,nottoharmanyone.TheCourtrejectedtheclaimforexemplary
punitivedamages.

WithrespecttotheprejudicetothePlaintiffs’honourandreputation,
$250,000.00wasclaimed.TheCourtfoundthatnoproofofsuchprejudice
wasmadeattrial.TheCourtfoundthatthePlaintiffs’honourandreputation
didnotsufferanyharmfromthispublication.However,theCourtfoundthat
thepressconferenceorganizedbythePlaintiffsandthepublicitysurrounding
theCourtproceedingshaveincreasedthe”visibility”ofthisadvertisement
whichwouldhavebeenratherdiscreethaditbeenlimitedtothepublication
intheVOIRnewspaper.TheCourtfoundthatpublicpersonalitiescanbethe
objectofsatireandjokesaslongastherearenoliesorfactualerrorsandno
intrusionintheirprivatelives.TheCourtfoundthattheadcouldbe
assimilatedtoamockeryoracaricaturewhichdidnottarnishthePlaintiffs’
honourorreputation.
TheCourthoweverfoundthathavingusedtheimageofPatrickNormanfor
commercialpurposeswithouthisauthorizationdidcausethePlaintiffsome
damageswhichtheCourtevaluatedat$5,000.00.Incomingtothis
conclusion,theCourtpointedoutthatiftheDefendantsgotanybenefitfrom
thecommercialuseofPatrickNorman’simage,thisbenefitwasgreatly
outweighedbythelegalcostswhichtheDefendantshadtobeartodefend
themselvesagainstmonetaryclaimswhichweregreatlyexagerated.The
Courtrefusedtoissuethepermanentinjunctionsinceithadbecomeuseless
consideringtheundertakingoftheDefendantsgivenonlyafewdaysafter
thepublicationofthead.
Readingbetweenthelines,itseemsclearthatthejudgefeltthatthiscase
shouldnothaveproceededtotrialandthatthePlaintiffsshouldhavebeen
morereasonableintheirmonetaryclaims.Hadtheybeenmorereasonable,
thecasewouldprobablyhavebeensettledrapidlyoutofCourtandthe
partieswouldhavesavedlegalfeesandalotofstress.

ROBIC,ungrouped’avocatsetd’agentsdebrevetsetdemarquesdecommercevoué
depuis1892àlaprotectionetàlavalorisationdelapropriétéintellectuelledanstousles
domaines:brevets,dessinsindustrielsetmodèlesutilitaires;marquesdecommerce,marques
decertificationetappellationsd’origine;droitsd’auteur,propriétélittéraireetartistique,droits
voisinsetdel’artisteinterprète;informatique,logicielsetcircuitsintégrés;biotechnologies,
pharmaceutiquesetobtentionsvégétales;secretsdecommerce,know-howetconcurrence;
licences,franchisesettransfertsdetechnologies;commerceélectronique,distributionetdroit
desaffaires;marquage,publicitéetétiquetage;poursuite,litigeetarbitrage;vérification
diligenteetaudit;etce,tantauCanadaqu’ailleursdanslemonde.Lamaîtrisedes
intangibles.
ROBIC,agroupoflawyersandofpatentandtrademarkagentsdedicatedsince1892tothe
protectionandthevalorizationofallfieldsofintellectualproperty:patents,industrialdesigns
andutilitypatents;trademarks,certificationmarksandindicationsoforigin;copyrightand
entertainmentlaw,artistsandperformers,neighbouringrights;computer,softwareand
integratedcircuits;biotechnologies,pharmaceuticalsandplantbreeders;tradesecrets,
know-how,competitionandanti-trust;licensing,franchisingandtechnologytransfers;e-
commerce,distributionandbusinesslaw;marketing,publicityandlabelling;prosecution
litigationandarbitration;duediligence;inCanadaandthroughouttheworld.Ideaslivehere.
COPYRIGHTER
IDEASLIVEHERE
ILATOUTDEMÊMEFALLUL’INVENTER!
LAMAÎTRISEDESINTANGIBLES
LEGERROBICRICHARD
NOSFENÊTRESGRANDESOUVERTESSURLEMONDEDESAFFAIRES
PATENTER
R
ROBIC
ROBIC+DROIT+AFFAIRES+SCIENCES+ARTS
ROBIC++++
ROBIC+LAW+BUSINESS+SCIENCE+ART
THETRADEMARKERGROUP
TRADEMARKER
VOSIDÉESÀLAPORTÉEDUMONDE,DESAFFAIRESÀLAGRANDEURDELAPLANÈTE
YOURBUSINESSISTHEWORLDOFIDEAS;OURBUSINESSBRINGSYOURIDEASTOTHEWORLD