The right of publicity has multiple definitions, but it goes a little something like this: it is the state-by-state law that dictates how a person’s name and likeness can be used for commercial purposes without their consent.
right of publicity有許多不同之定義。但其係雷同如以下：隨各州規範未經當事人同意，以商業目的利用其姓名及樣貌稱之。
Despite being very public-facing figures, celebrities do have the right of publicity, allowing them to control the commercial use of their respective names, images or likenesses, or the other unequivocal aspects of their own identities. It allows them to keep their image and likeness from being commercially exploited without permission or contractual compensation.
即便成為公眾人物、名人，仍擁有所謂公開化的權利（雖然就某程度而言，不管該人之姓名、樣貌、聲音等已公開，其仍有禁止他人未得其同意而商業利用上揭客體的權利；甚至就可連結到該人之身分的聯繫因子皆屬之，此可稱為就可區隔或辨別某人「身分同一性」的連繫因子，都算是個人公開權所要保護的對象）。
The right of publicity can be violated when a company uses a celebrity’s name or likeness for advertising purposes without their explicit permission. It is for this reason that all celebrities used in advertisements or endorsements sign consent or release agreements.
當一個公司未得名人明示之同意，以商業目的利用名人的姓名或樣貌，係侵害個人公開權。這也是所有名人其姓名或樣貌被用於廣告或代言，會簽署同意書或公開協議。
The right of publicity is not violated, however, if the celebrity’s name or likeness is used in a non-commercial way. That type of use is protected by the First Amendment. Don’t get too excited, though; what is defined as “non-commercial” can be a bit of a gray area (especially in the age of social media).
然而，如果名人之姓名或樣貌，非以商業為目的被利用，即不構成侵害公開權（名氣權）。此種利用方式，受美國憲法第一修正案之保護。但別高興得太早，究竟何謂「非商業性」之利用，其範圍為何？係一灰色地帶，特別是在社群媒介的時代。
