We'll Make Time for You. McPhillips Legal Research: Research and Writing Services for Attorneys dingbat graphic

201 East City Hall Avenue
Suite 605
Norfolk, VA 23510
(757) 457-8398

Subscribe

Celebrity Legal Issues

Tiger Woods Involved in Irony! (As Opposed to Irons) In Some Minds, Privacy Equals Publicity

Tiger Woods obviously has little or no privacy in his life. He recently married a blond, Scandinavian supermodel, so the chances of the two of them having any privacy in the future are as slim as she is.

In an attempt to remedy the imposition of the public eye, Mr. Woods bought a new luxury yacht from Christensen Shipyards, Ltd. The sales contract included a very specific confidentiality clause which barred Christensen from publicizing its manufacture of the yacht and the sale to Mr. Woods. Armed with the confidence that he would at last have a respite from curious duffers and stargazers, Mr. Woods named his new getaway Privacy.

Christensen, though, proceeded to publicize all the fixtures and accoutrerments of Privacy in various yachting publications and at trade shows, while casually mentioning that it had sold the boat to some professional golfer named after a large, striped beast.

The professional golfer named after a large, striped beast was not pleased and sued Christensen in the Federal District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Mr. Woods alleged that Christensen breached its contract with him and had used his name, image, or likeness for commercial gain without permission in violation of Fla. Stat. Ann § 548.08. Mr. Woods sought an immediate injunction to stop Christensen from continuing to publicize Privacy. He also requested damages for breach of contract that, due to his established value as an endorser and promoter of products, could exceed $50 million.

A few days after Mr. Woods’ filing of the complaint, the district court judge, with the assent of Christensen,. issued a preliminary injunction that immediately barred Christensen from further using Mr. Woods’ name, image, or likeness and from further disclosing its association with Privacy. Apparently Christensen’s lawyers pointed out to its marketing department that the contract somewhat frowned upon the department’s publicity campaign, which could end up the most expensive in the company’s history.