Kournikova

Kournikova v. General Media Communications, Inc.

Good Law
278 F. Supp. 2d 1111·2003 WL 21804816·31 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2007·67 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1395·2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13159
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMay 2, 2003CV 02-3747 GAFCalifornia9,351 words

Opinion

Opinion

Feess, J.

ORDER RE DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON LANHAM ACT CLAIM OF THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

I.

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Anna Kournikova, the popular and internationally-known women’s tennis player, brings suit against General Media Communications, Inc. (“GMC”) for publishing in Penthouse Magazine partially nude photographs of another woman falsely identified as Kournikova. Kournikova claims that the display of these falsely identified photographs constitutes false advertising and false endorsement under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. GMC now moves for summary judgment on the Fifth Cause of Action in the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) asserting that Kournikova lacks standing to assert the false advertising claim, that the undisputed facts are insufficient to permit either the false advertisement or the false endorsement claim to be presented to a jury, and that the First Amendment bars Kourniko-va’s false endorsement claim because she has no evidence that GMC acted with bad intent.

The Court agrees that the false advertising claim lacks merit. The Fifth Cause of Action, contains no allegations that amount to a false advertising claim, and the record shows no evidence…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.