Comment: Has Ron Paul actually

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I changed my mind (see in situ)

Has Ron Paul actually

Has Ron Paul actually trademarked his name and likeness?

People can't sell Elvis stuff because the Elvis estate has a trademark on Elvis's likeness, but of course Elvis impersonators in various other formats are legal and permissible.

Or, if Ron Paul is suing on the basis of Publicity Rights, then aren't the DailyPaul, RonPaulForums, RonPaulFlix, etc. also all diluting and violating Ron Paul's publicity rights? It seems to me Ron abandoned his publicity rights long ago when he permitted and even encouraged his supporters to disseminate his name and likeness in endless manners of their own choosings. Once abandoned, publicity rights cannot be reclaimed simply because an enterprising party creates something of value from the abandoned property.

For example, if Ron Paul wanted to create his own discussion board where he might also sell web advertisements such as those on the DailyPaul, he can't simply force DailyPaul to shut down because DailyPaul attracts users using Ron Paul's name.