Former Dictator Manuel Noriega Sues Over Call of Duty

Noriega Right Of Publicity

In the latest installment in the Call of Duty franchise, Black Ops II, video game maker Activision took the bold step of moving away from the traditional terrorist or Nazi villain in favor of Former Panamanian Dictator Manuel Noriega. Ousted from power in 1989, Noriega has remained relatively quiet since his release from prison three years ago. Now, Noriega has come out of hiding to sue Activision, and their parent company, Blizzard Entertainment for the Unauthorized Use of His Name and Likeness, also known as the Right of Publicity. Noriega says that the game falsely portrays him as a “kidnapper, murderer, and an enemy of the state for the purpose of increasing sales, at his expense.

The Right of Publicity: an Increasingly Popular Legal Tactic

A Right of Publicity claim has been increasingly popular among celebrities wishing to push back on exploitation of their popularity. Just this past July, Lindsay Lohan sued Take-Two Interactive Inc. and its parent company, Rockstar Games, for creating a character in “Grand Theft Auto V” based on her persona, or so she claims. As well, several college NCAA players reached a $40-million settlement with Electronic Arts for the use of their likenesses. With COD Black Ops II generating over $1 billion in sales within the first two weeks of its release, it’s not hard to see why Noriega and his attorney see dollar signs.

Can Noriega Win This Lawsuit?

It may seem ridiculous that a Dictator can sue for using his likeness, but does that mean that a Dictator’s persona is in the public

Noriega Black Ops II

domain, available for anyone to use? If so, who makes that decision and what level of criminality is required fort someone to lose their Right of Publicity? Does the rule apply to any criminal or only terrorists and dictators?

Those questions are not easily answered so in that respect; Noriega’s case has merit. But can he win?

To begin any legal analysis, we must first look at the elements required to win a cause of action such as the Right of Publicity. Each state may have slightly different elements, but in California, where Noriega filed his case, the elements are:

  1. use of a person’s identity; 
  2. appropriated a person’s name and likeness for commercial or other advantages; 
  3. Lack of permission for the use 
  4. and the plaintiff was injured by the use.

That’s it. There is nothing about being a dictator, a criminal, or any other type of person. So can Noriega prove them? Well, 1,2, and 3 don’t seem particularly difficult. Noriega is clearly recognizable in the game, which is a commercial product, and Noriega never gave Activision his permission. Injury however is another matter.

Did Activision Harm Noriega?

There are two types of harm the court will review. The first is financial harm or economic loss. Since a person has the right to control products attached to his name, Noriega might be entitled to the profits attributed to the use of his name. Or, if Noriega can show he lost a business opportunity due to Black Ops II, he could recover for that loss. For example, Noriega will try to recover the value of the licensing fee he would have required for the use of his likeness. But what would be the price, if any, for a former criminal Dictator?

Second, the court may also take into account injury to peace, happiness, and feelings, as well as injury to goodwill, professional standing, and future publicity value. Noriega will have a hard time convincing a Judge or jury that Black Ops II harmed his professional standing and happiness?

It’s too early to know how this case will play out, but it is unlikely to go Noriega’s way. As much as Justices must follow the letter of the law, there is quite a bit of leeway in its spelling. The Judge in this case will not want to be remembered for requiring video game makers (and maybe even Film studios), to pay licensing fees to former dictators. But if Noriega’s lawyers can prove the required elements, the Judge may have no choice.

Let us know what you think about Noriega’s lawsuit in the Comments section below. And, if you help us build our audience by sharing this article on your social media, we would really appreciate it.

About the author

Steve Schlackman

As a photographer and Patent Attorney with a background in marketing, Steve has a unique perspective on art and law. Should you have any questions on Intellectual Property contact him at [email protected] His photography can be seen online at or on display at the Emmanuel Fremin Gallery in New York City.


Click here to post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • I am certainly no fan of Noriega, nor am I a lawyer, but I instinctively feel that he has a case, especially since this is about commercial usage of his likeness.

    It is hard of me to believe that Activision did not consider the distinct possibility that Noriega would sue, and my guess is that they have factored the possibility of a successful lawsuit into their budget. I actually wonder if they think the publicity from a lawsuit might help to market their product.

    • I agree with you. I would doubt Activision never considered the possibility. They either have already considered the law and believe they have a strong case, or as you said, they wanted the publicity. Or maybe they just never thought he would sue, considering he was in hiding. It’ll be interesting to see how it turns out, but my guess is they won’t want to go to trial so they will offer a nice settlement that gives Activision the right to use him in the next installment as well.

Join the Creative Movement


Orangenius is an online platform that unites the creative economy and helps you succeed. Show and share your work, give and get credit, and cultivate important connections.


The Latest From Artrepreneur