Steve Jobs Action Figure

[megoapesnut]

Darn Apple, shutting down the sale of the Steve Jobs action figure. They did a superb job, looks exactly like him

AppleInsider Article

[LonnieFisher]

That's an awesome likeness. I wish we could get that quality in the 8" format!!

[MegoMark71]

I saw that today as well that they were blocking the sale of it. My thoughts were if they donated a percentage of the profits to a charity that it would have been a nice tribute. Forever remembered in plastic.

[Adam West]

I am not a lawyer but I don't think Apple will be able to win a challenge of selling a Steve Jobs action figure as long as there is nothing with Apple products in it. I would think the company could go to the Jobs family and offer to pay a licensing royalty to them directly. I seriously doubt they could win a legal claim that they own the right to Steve Jobs' likeness.

[kennermike]

Thats just Stupid LOL

[Brown Bear]

Silly choice for an action figure. Looks like they're making money from his death.

[MIB41]

I am not a lawyer but I don't think Apple will be able to win a challenge of selling a Steve Jobs action figure as long as there is nothing with Apple products in it. I would think the company could go to the Jobs family and offer to pay a licensing royalty to them directly. I seriously doubt they could win a legal claim that they own the right to Steve Jobs' likeness.

The article says they successfully stopped the sell of a sculpt in 2010, so they may indeed have some legal papers in his likeness.

[Adam West]

The article says they successfully stopped the sell of a sculpt in 2010, so they may indeed have some legal papers in his likeness.

He was holding and iPhone and sitting on top of an Apple logo. That is where I think Apple has a case. Like I said, I'm not a lawyer but had to take quite a few law classes and am not sure if Apple has rights to his likeness. Did Walter Issacson pay Apple a royalty for placing a picture of Steve Jobs on the cover of his biography? If so, then I think there is a case. It's a good sculpt either way.

[Brazoo]

The biography was authorized - and even if it wasn't there's a legal difference between writing a book about a real person, and selling merchandise with a person's likeness on it - so far as I know.

[Werewolf]

The biography was authorized - and even if it wasn't there's a legal difference between writing a book about a real person, and selling merchandise with a person's likeness on it - so far as I know.

What about the Presidential Monsters and the Obama figures? I don't believe those are authorized. I always wondered how they legally did that. Historical figures, like Lincoln and Washington, are probably more or less public domain but with living and recent Presidents it has to be sort of a grey area.

[Brazoo]

I could see Apple saying Jobs's likeness is part of their intellectual property - it's probably part of an agreement Apple has with Jobs as figurehead of the company.

If this was a case of who owned Jobs's image between Jobs's estate and Apple, I think it's a much different thing than this. With all due respect I don't see Jobs's family caring much about royalties from a niche market collector's action figure - and for sure not months after his death.

[Brazoo]

What about the Presidential Monsters and the Obama figures? I don't believe those are authorized. I always wondered how they legally did that. Historical figures, like Lincoln and Washington, are probably more or less public domain but with living and recent Presidents it has to be sort of a grey area.

I don't know - Obama might not have wanted to sue - or different rights might apply to people who take public office like that - I'm not sure about that.

In any case - from following intellectual property type suits in the media - sometimes it's more about who has the bigger purse more than who's legally correct. For example - Apple can probably pay a lot more for legal expenses without feeling it than this toy company can.

I DO know that there are dead public figures with very successful and litigious estates. In those cases I think there are usually corporations set up by the estates to manage likeness for licensing merchandise - so in this case Apple may have an arrangement to protect and control Jobs's image. I'm just speculating, but it doesn't seem unrealistic to me.

[Hector]

I want that Steve Jobs figure...it will complement my Mac Pro perfectly...

[Adam West]

I could see Apple saying Jobs's likeness is part of their intellectual property - it's probably part of an agreement Apple has with Jobs as figurehead of the company.

If this was a case of who owned Jobs's image between Jobs's estate and Apple, I think it's a much different thing than this. With all due respect I don't see Jobs's family caring much about royalties from a niche market collector's action figure - and for sure not months after his death.

With all due respect I disagree. If you can point out another case in which a CEO of a major corporation is intellectual property...I'd like to see it. Furthermore, Jobs had a love/hate relationship with Apple (the corporation). He was not someone who was driven by material wealth (otherwise he would have died the richest person in history). There is no public evidence that suggests that Apple owned Steve Jobs likeness.

[Brazoo]

With all due respect I disagree. If you can point out another case in which a CEO of a major corporation is intellectual property...I'd like to see it. Furthermore, Jobs had a love/hate relationship with Apple (the corporation). He was not someone who was driven by material wealth (otherwise he would have died the richest person in history). There is no public evidence that suggests that Apple owned Steve Jobs likeness.

It's all speculative - but I assume that because corporations have been set up to handle the likeness of other dead (and living) celebrities that a similar arrangement may have been made between Jobs and Apple.

I'm not speculating that Apple owns Jobs's image - I'm speculating he may have arranged an agreement where they protect his image.

In any case - Apple doesn't have to be legally correct in order to sue.