## Facts

- Clint Eastwood sued National Enquirer, Inc. in California superior court.
- The complaint alleged (1) false light invasion of privacy and (2) invasion of privacy through commercial appropriation of his name, photograph, and likeness under common law and Cal. Civ. Code § 3344.
- The Enquirer published an article describing Eastwood’s alleged romantic involvement with two women; Eastwood alleged the story was false but presented as true.
- Eastwood alleged the Enquirer used his name and photograph on the cover and in related promotional advertising, without authorization, to attract attention and increase sales.
- The trial court sustained a general demurrer to the commercial-appropriation/right-of-publicity claim without leave to amend.
- Eastwood sought a writ of mandate directing the trial court to vacate that ruling.

## Issues

1. Whether unauthorized use of a celebrity’s name, photograph, or likeness on a publication’s cover and related advertising, connected to a nondefamatory article alleged to be false but presented as true, can constitute actionable commercial exploitation under the common-law right of publicity and Cal. Civ. Code § 3344(a).
2. Whether such use is barred by the First Amendment or exempt as a “news account” under Cal. Civ. Code § 3344(d).
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend where the pleading could be cured, including by alleging knowledge or reckless disregard of falsity.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal held the alleged use could constitute commercial exploitation actionable under both common law and § 3344(a).
- The court held the First Amendment and § 3344(d)’s news-account exemption do not protect the use where the publication is alleged to present knowing or reckless falsehoods as truth.
- The court concluded the demurrer should not have been sustained without leave to amend because any defect (including failure to plead scienter) was potentially curable.
- The court issued mandate directing the superior court to vacate its order sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend as to the second cause of action.

## Legal Principles

- A right-of-publicity/commercial-appropriation claim is distinct from defamation or false light; it targets unauthorized commercial use of identity to sell or advertise, not reputational harm.
- Use of a celebrity’s identity on a publication cover and in related advertising may constitute “commercial exploitation” for purposes of the common-law right of publicity and Cal. Civ. Code § 3344(a).
- Cal. Civ. Code § 3344(d)’s “news account” exemption does not immunize identity use connected to content alleged to be knowing or reckless falsehoods presented as true.
- First Amendment protection for news reporting does not extend to knowing or reckless falsehoods used in a manner that functions as commercial promotion.
- When a complaint suggests a viable theory but omits curable allegations (including scienter where required), sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend is error.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeal required the trial court to permit amendment of Eastwood’s right-of-publicity claim, holding that a tabloid’s unauthorized cover and advertising use of a celebrity’s identity to promote an allegedly knowing or reckless false story can constitute actionable commercial exploitation and is not automatically shielded as “news.”


Eastwood v. Superior Court, 149 Cal. App. 3d 409, 198 Cal. Rptr. 342 (Ct. App. 1983)