Court Rules in 'Morphing' Case

LOS ANGELES, Calif. — In a California case of particular interest to webmasters, an appellate court has ruled that a suit over use of computer-altered likenesses is time-barred under the Uniform Single Publication Act (USPA).

The 2nd District Court of Appeal on Tuesday affirmed judgment for The Walt Disney Co. in a case that alleged the media giant defamed plaintiffs by broadcasting their likenesses.

Plaintiffs Dean Long Jr. and others sued Disney Jan. 18, 2002, for using sixth-grade yearbook photographs altered by computers into characters that were incorporated as fictional, cartoon-like characters in a series of vignettes broadcast in Saturday morning children’s programming on ABC television, as well as other retail products and Internet tie-ins.

All of the images, which Disney admitted appropriating, had been discontinued by Jan. 17, 2000.

By missing the two-year statute of limitations by one day under the USPA, the court turned to a 1987 Ohio case, Morgan v. Hustler Magazine Inc. for guidance. That court ruled the claims are governed by the USPA and the longest statute of limitations applicable by plaintiffs’ action is two years.

Long and other plaintiffs contend they did not see the broadcast or become aware of the use of their likenesses in time under USPA.

“The fact that these plaintiffs did not see the broadcasts does not change the fact that, unlike a credit files, these images were in plain view,” the court wrote in Dean Long et al. v. The Walt Disney Co. “Allowing these plaintiffs to sue years after the broadcasts ceased, without any indication of fraud or a meaningful inability to discover the broadcasts, would violate the principal policy that underlies the rule.”

The court further said that “there was no evidence that the likenesses that were broadcast, morphed as they were, were unrecognizable to each of the plaintiffs at their first viewing.”

It also said the policy issue is clear, that the USPA was designed to eliminate “ungovernable piecemeal liability.”

Copyright © 2025 Adnet Media. All Rights Reserved. XBIZ is a trademark of Adnet Media.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.

More News

New Age Verification Service 'AgeWallet' Launches

Tech company Brady Mills Agency has officially launched its subscription-based age verification solution, AgeWallet.

AEBN Publishes Popular Searches for September, October

AEBN has published the top search terms for the months of September and October from its straight and gay theaters in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Creator, Influencer YesKingzTV Passes Away at 47

Adult content creator and social media personality YesKingzTV, aka Micheal Willis Heard, has passed away at the age of 47.

Pre-Nominations Now Open for 2026 TEAs

The pre-nomination period for the 2026 Trans Erotica Awards (TEAs) is now open.

FSC Releases Updated Age Verification Toolkit

The Free Speech Coalition (FSC) has announced the release of its updated age verification toolkit.

Duke Tax Joins Pineapple Support as Supporter-Level Sponsor

Duke Tax has joined the ranks of over 70 adult businesses and organizations committing funds and resources to Pineapple Support.

UK Moving Ahead with Plan to Outlaw 'Choking' Content

The U.K. government has announced its intent to follow through on criminalizing “choking” content, a plan that was announced earlier this year.

Italy to Require Age Verification for Adult Sites

Italian media regulator AGCOM has announced that all sites and platforms hosting adult content will be required to implement age verification systems starting Nov. 12 to prevent access by users under 18.

'MILFlicious' Launches Through YourPaysitePartner

MILFlicious.com has officially launched through YourPaysitePartner (YPP).

Op-Ed: The Guardian's XBIZ Amsterdam Podcast Dismisses Creators' Experiences

British newspaper The Guardian’s podcast coverage of XBIZ Amsterdam 2025 purports to investigate the power dynamics of today’s online adult industry. Instead, it ignores creators’ voices, airs tired and outdated preconceptions about the business, and rehashes the unsupported claims of anti-pornography crusaders.

Show More