A bill brought before the Senate Judiciary Committee intending to make it possible to create a museum dedicated to Russell Means led to a lengthy discussion of right of publicity. Lawmakers eventually passed House Bill 1225.
House Bill 1225 prohibits the unauthorized commercial use of a personality’s right of publicity. Representative Elizabeth May says some constituents want to put a museum on Russell Means’s ranch in Porcupine. She says in order for that to happen, the state has to have a right of publicity law in place, protecting things like a personality’s name, voice, and likeness from being used in the commercial setting without that person’s permission.
“It not only is going to protect Mr. Means’s legacy, but it’s also going to protect his family,” May says. “And we can send, you know there’s not a lot of things that we can do for development on the reservation as a state. This is a perfect way to send a message that the legacy of Russell Means, whether you agreed or disagreed with him politically, he was a huge influence for the Native American people.”
The committee meeting drew representatives from the Motion Picture Association, who are for the measure, and people with organizations that represent national football, basketball and other player’s associations, who don’t support the bill. They say the implications of the measure go far beyond a museum in South Dakota.
Opponents say House Bill 1225 doesn’t fully account for new technologies. Kevin Goering is a lawyer in New York City. He says section 12 of the bill says that this law replaces every other law that has anything to do with the right of publicity. He says what South Dakota decides matters.
“It’s important because these statutes, one by one, add to the nationwide pattern of the right of publicity and how it is enacted state by state,” Goering says.
In the end, committee members passed the measure with a four to three vote. They encouraged those on both sides of the issue to come together and find some solutions.