Post by gato on Jun 2, 2022 6:01:09 GMT -5
"The licensing company that controls the Elvis Presley name and image is ordering wedding chapel operators in Las Vegas to stop using Elvis in themed ceremonies, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported.
Authentic Brands Group sent cease-and-desist letters in early May to multiple chapels, which are expected to be compliant by now. But with Elvis so closely tied to the Vegas wedding industry, some say the move could damage business." --- The Guardian
I suppose there are workarounds ... a chapel could present "jus some fat guy in sequins and sunglasses," and deny that he is a representation of The King.
The company that controls the likeness of Elvis as well as Marilyn Monroe and Mohammed Ali, are of course looking for licensing deals, but there is some murkiness.
"In Las Vegas, impersonating someone for live performances is considered an exception under Nevada’s right of publicity law."
So maybe a gyrating Elvis impersonator at a wedding would be considered a live performance, with the bride and groom as the audience ....?
Authentic Brands Group sent cease-and-desist letters in early May to multiple chapels, which are expected to be compliant by now. But with Elvis so closely tied to the Vegas wedding industry, some say the move could damage business." --- The Guardian
I suppose there are workarounds ... a chapel could present "jus some fat guy in sequins and sunglasses," and deny that he is a representation of The King.
The company that controls the likeness of Elvis as well as Marilyn Monroe and Mohammed Ali, are of course looking for licensing deals, but there is some murkiness.
"In Las Vegas, impersonating someone for live performances is considered an exception under Nevada’s right of publicity law."
So maybe a gyrating Elvis impersonator at a wedding would be considered a live performance, with the bride and groom as the audience ....?
