Voice Over Success Formula

Just read a very interesting article by Rob Sciglimpaglia http://www.robertpaglia.com/ He is an attorney and voice over actor. Rob’s article was part of the Voices 2008 Seminar.

We have many friends and colleagues who are making quite a living as a voice impersonator.  Here are some great points that can you may want to consider when asked to lend your impersonation to a project.  As always let us know if you found this article helpful and share your thoughts or questions.

A) Celebrity Impersonating
One area of the industry that voice over artists should be cognizant of is celebrity impersonating. Celebrity impersonating falls under the auspices of the area of law known as “right of publicity” laws. The right of publicity is the right of an individual[1] to commercially exploit their name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness. A handful of States have specific laws concerning the “right of publicity” and some other States that do not have a statute follow the common law rules concerning the right of publicity.[2]
“Right of Publicity” laws would allow a celebrity to sue a voice talent who impersonates their voice for commercial purposes.[3] Nevada’s statute, however, specifically exempts impersonators from liability for infringement of a celebrity’s right of publicity.[4]
Such an exemption does not exist in other State’s statutes, however, so a voice over artist must always be alert when asked to impersonate a celebrity as to how the impersonation will be used. In general, the First Amendment allows certain uses of impersonations, but generally not when those impersonations are meant to generate profits. Such profit making use most certainly can expose both the voice talent, and the producer of the spot to a lawsuit.
This goes for impersonating celebrities who are either alive or deceased, as many Statutes provide a protection to the celebrity for some years after they have died. For instance, in Nevada, the celebrity is protected for fifty (50) years after death[5], where in Indiana the protection remains for one hundred (100) years.[6] For deceased celebrities, their heirs will be the ones deciding who is able to use their loved one’s likeness and who cannot.
B) Product Endorsements
Another potential snake pit for the voice-over artist is in the area of product endorsements.
Product Liability laws in the United States are generally designed to protect the consumer from dangerous or defective products. These laws are usually couched in terms of “strict liability” rather than “ordinary negligence”. This means that anyone involved with the manufacture, sale, or distribution of a product that causes an injury to the end user can not only be sued by the injured party, but will also be held strictly liable without the need for the injured party to prove that the defendants did anything negligent. The simple fact that the product was put into commerce and caused an injury, in many jurisdictions, is enough for the injured party to recover.
In addition, there are a variety of consumer protection laws, unfair trade practice statutes and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulations and guidelines designed to protect consumers from being ripped off by false and misleading advertisements.
This raises an interesting question concerning whether a voice-over artist is hired to record a commercial that says something like: “This drug is THE best out there for the prevention and cure of this disease, and I personally guarantee it will work for you” and the drug ends up killing the user, whether the voice-over artist could be held liable for that “guarantee.”
If the voice over artist were a celebrity, then they certainly could be sued under a number of theories, including product liability, but also consumer protection statutes, and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) guidelines against false and misleading advertising.[7] One is reminded of the series of lawsuits against Robin Leach back in 1999 where at least a dozen Attorney’s General across the country sued him for endorsing vacation packages in both television and radio ads that turned out to be bogus.
Although one must wonder if such lawsuits would be brought against non-celebrity voice talent that are not so “high profile”, one of the functions of an Attorney General is to discover collectable assets that could be attached to pay back “victims” of false and misleading ads, or to pay back “victims” of dangerous products, so the possibility certainly exists that such a lawsuit could be brought against a voice-over artist that has some assets.

[1] The “right of publicity” usually involves impersonating celebrities, but the majority rule in most jurisdictions extends the “right of publicity” to non-celebrities as well, meaning anyone whose name, likeness or voice is used or impersonated can bring a lawsuit. The “right of publicity” has NOT yet been extended to animated characters, however. See, J.T. McCarthy, The Rights of Publicity and Privacy, §4.3 (1989).

[2] By no means is the “right of publicity” internationally recognized at this time and this area of law is ever emerging. Another emerging area of law relating to the “right of publicity” is “celebrity licensing” which has to do with the right of a celebrity to “license” the use of his likeness, similar to licensing the use of a copyright.

[3] See the famous impersonator cases on this issue; Midler v. Ford Motor Co., 849 F.2d 460 (9TH Cir. 1989); Waits v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 978 F.2d 1093 (9th Cir. 1992); White vs. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 971 F.2d 1395 (9th Cir. 1992).

[4] See Nev. Rev. Statutes, NRS §597.790, et seq.

[5] Nev Rev. Stat. §597.790 (1).

[6] Ind. Code Ann. §§32-13-1 et seq.

[7] The FTC requires pitchmen to base their endorsements on honest beliefs based on either personal experience or independent investigation of the endorsed product or service.

Business Tips