New mashup site stirs gnashing at SAG, elsewhere

Plenty of people fantasize about meeting celebrities. How about inhabiting their bodies and mouthing their lines?

A new website called Mashface lets users choose photos of celebrities and superimpose webcam recordings and sound effects to make -- presumably -- humorous video messages that they can post on social network sites like YouTube. "You can do things like make Britney give parenting advice, or have Brad Pitt remind your friend of something stupid he did the night before," touts a press release from the site's creator, Montreal-based Xtranormal Technology Inc.

But Mashface wasn't drawing laughs from the Screen Actors Guild, which has been fighting to protect the exploitation of actors' images and likenesses on the Web. "I'm sorry, it's not a harmless form of expression when you're taking people's images and holding them up to ridicule,'' says Kent McCord, who chairs SAG's new-technologies committee and who played recurring roles on "Dragnet" and "Adam-12," among other series. "It's a violation of the law."

Ricky Cheung, executive producer of Xtranormal, disputes that assessment, saying the images on Mashface are a form of parody and therefore covered by the "fair use" doctrine under federal copyright law. The company launched Mashface two weeks ago to help drive traffic to another website that allows people to make their own animated movies, and has since drawn 50,000 visitors, Cheung says.

Actors have long been sensitive to how their images are used. The guild joined Fred Astaire's widow in 1999 to push successfully for a California law to protect the images of deceased celebrities after a commercial featured Astaire dancing with a Dirt Devil vacuum cleaner. Then last year, California passed a more comprehensive protection law after Marilyn Monroe's face began appearing in unauthorized products, including "Marilyn Monroe hipster panties" sold on the Internet.

More recently, SAG balked at a studio proposal that would allow the studios to sell or license excerpts of TV shows and movies for use on the Internet, cellphones and other new-media devices without actors' consent. Instead, the studios proposed obtaining blanket consent at the time an actor is hired. The sides are still haggling over just how that would work.

Barry Tyerman, an entertainment attorney whose celebrity clients include Robert Redford and Sean Connery, says he is not familiar with Mashface but believes it typifies the widespread exploitation of actors' images across the Web.

"We spend a fair amount of time writing cease-and-desist letters to various websites,'' he says. "It's like stamping out ants at a picnic."

-- Richard Verrier

Photo: A mashup from Mashface.com

Comments

[kudzu fire]

distrubing

[Jean-François Deschênes]

Hi Richard,

As DG of Web Operations of Xtranormal Technology, I am inclined to defend our position after reading this post.

Public figures make millions of dollars lending their image to the people everyday. They have made conscious decisions to put their faces on billboards, in movie theaters, on magazine covers, on the internet, and on a variety of other easily accessible mediums. When you share your image with millions of people, the public has the right to use that image in parody. That’s the beauty of free speech, isn’t it?

With Mashface, we haven’t invented anything new. Satirists have borrowed images for parody for generations. We’re simply making it easier for the public to express themselves. After all, don’t you believe non-celebrity individuals should have the right to share their images and opinions, too? These are new technologies that we should be embracing rather than trying to stifle or put against the law and against free speech.

It’s very important to note that the examples you bring up (Astaire with a Dirt Devil; Monroe on a pair of panties) are all based on the commercial use of an image – which is entirely contrary to the point and capabilities of Mashface. We’re simply providing an avenue for satirical artistic expression without hindering the law. In fact, legality has very little if no place in this discussion.

If you consider acting an art, then you should consider what true artists believe about self-expression. Borrowing an idea, image or object to create an original, relevant concept is nothing new. As artists, actors should understand the concept of free expression and embrace it. If you want to look at it from a business standpoint, actors should be looking for ways to use these outlets to their advantage! There is no better way for an individual to drive the way the public perceives him or her than to embrace new technologies and concepts.

As an entertainment attorney, Mr. Barry Tyerman’s concerns are certainly valid, but we sincerely believe he should be more concerned about the exploitation of an actor’s image as portrayed in glam magazines, some of which write about anything but the truth, without any hint of satire. But, these “artists” don’t seem to mind a little positive attention, do they?

Sincerely,
Jean-François Deschênes