Good answer above. It's the difference between "can" (the technology exists) and "may" (it's a violation of right of publicity, at least, to use a...

Edit the document. Will they permit it? Who knows. But if you edit and they sign, that should define what is excluded. I have one with my...

It can't be answered on Avvo except in the most general terms. Facts can't be copyrighted. Compilations of facts can be copyrighted. Fair use...

You can probably find somebody local by contacting a local bar association. The State bar association headquarters is in Springfield. "Technical"...

It's not copyright -- the photographer owns the copyright -- it's right of publicity. That's using your likeness for commercial purposes without...

If you were the photographer, an independent contractor and what they posted was unaltered the presumption is you are the "author" for Copyright...

More facts will be important. If they've reproduced your music, prepared a derivative, distributed or performed it, they could be an infringer. ...

That's not how things work. Copyright is for art, literature and music, not names. Copyright requires originality, so taking from someone else...

Maybe. Maybe not. It is impossible to answer without knowing the actual words and what they mean relative to the goods or services offered. And...

If it's recognizable, it's probably infringing. The issue is whether there is a likelihood that consumers would think there was endorsement or...