Haaland’s Ponytail Suit Exposes Risks of Social Media Marketing – Bloomberg Law News

Connecting decision makers to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas, Bloomberg quickly and accurately delivers business and financial information, news and insight around the world
Americas+1 212 318 2000
EMEA+44 20 7330 7500
Asia Pacific+65 6212 1000
Connecting decision makers to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas, Bloomberg quickly and accurately delivers business and financial information, news and insight around the world
Americas+1 212 318 2000
EMEA+44 20 7330 7500
Asia Pacific+65 6212 1000
Soccer superstar Erling Haaland’s suit against a Norwegian airline that posted an image of his styled ponytail on one of its planes is raising new concerns about likeness rights in the age of social media.
Haaland filed a complaint against Norwegian Air Shuttle ASA over an Instagram ad campaign that included his now-shorn ponytail on the cockpit of a plane. The ad didn’t show his face, but the tresses were easily identified.
The company reportedly said in response to the Oct. 9 lawsuit that the image was one of several ads during the 2026 FIFA World Cup in June as a show of support for Norway’s soccer team, calling them “a few spontaneous posts inspired by trends on social media.”
The airline isn’t the first to face publicity rights challenges, and those prior suits against big names like Samsung and Ford notched wins for celebrity plaintiffs despite involving neither name nor face.
But the Haaland case highlights the novel traps of the social media landscape when companies turn from orchestrated ad campaigns to brand banter with consumers and persona-building on corporate accounts.
And harnessing viral trends and whimsical memes that individuals routinely wield without legal consequence can create substantial corporate liability in even informal commercial contexts.
“Social media teams get lulled into a sense of this being ok because they’re seeing it throughout their feed,” said IP attorney Jennifer A. Van Kirk of Womble Bond Dickinson. “They don’t always appreciate the difference between what they do on their own social media account and what they do on the company’s behalf, and don’t appreciate the risk.”
Haaland, who filed his suit in Norway, would have a strong right-of-publicity case in the US, attorneys said. But the Scandinavian country’s law also frowns on unlicensed exploitation of an identity, said law professor Inger B. Ørstavik of the University of Oslo. It actually goes beyond US law by barring any public display of a person’s image without consent.
“If it’s recognizable, the right can come into play,” Ørstavik said. As in the US, there are exceptions such as news and satire, but use “can be more restrictive in the context of commercial advertising,” she added.
The 1988 Vanna White robot at the heart of a lawsuit against Samsung Electronic Arts represents a quintessential example of the reach of “name, image, and likeness” rights.
The “Wheel of Fortune” star sued the tech giant for running a print advertisement for VCRs with a gold-wigged robot turning letters on a board, depicting a futuristic 2012. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit allowed White to advance her publicity rights claims, and a jury eventually awarded her $400,000.
The appeals court found that despite the absence of facial features or White’s name, Samsung still exploited her identity.
Haaland’s case is “a little bit different” because the robot was doing what White was widely known to do, said IP attorney Olivia M. Clavio of Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath. But the hair-plane was still recognizable as Haaland’s, she said.
“That’s the North Star of right of publicity: what is it we’re commercializing,” Clavio said. “If it’s something so easily recognizable that you know who it is, we have crossed into that territory.”
Other famous Ninth Circuit plaintiff wins involve voice imitation of singer/actors Bette Midler in 1988 and Tom Waits in 1992 in radio ads for Ford Motor Co. and Frito-Lay Inc., respectively. The court also found in 1998 that Brooklyn Dodgers pitcher Don Newcombe’s distinctive windup in a Coors beer ad also could support a claim without his name or face attached.
“It’s not how the defendant has appropriated the plaintiff’s identity, but whether they have,” said sports law professor John T. Wolohan of Syracuse University. “Clearly they intended to take Haaland’s image and put it in the consumer’s mind.”
While Norwegian Air Shuttle ran a concerted ad campaign involving multiple posts, other corporate social media activity can be more spontaneous. Regardless, the result can be costly — particularly when the plaintiff’s image can command large sums.
In 2009, Sports Illustrated placed ads from two Chicago-area grocery chains in a special issue commemorating Michael Jordan’s Basketball Hall of Fame induction. Jewel-Osco’s and now-defunct Dominick’s Finer Foods included the number 23 and references to Jordan’s career.
The Seventh Circuit in 2014 rejected a ruling that Jewel-Osco’s ad wasn’t commercial because it didn’t promote a transaction, finding it still promoted the brand. A jury later awarded Jordan $8.9 million from Dominick’s, and Jewel-Osco settled.
“There’s a lot less leeway for companies when it’s commercial use,” said business and entertainment law professor John Simson of American University.
He noted that the “cute ad” presaged Haaland propelling Norway in the tournament. “But yeah, they crossed a line,” Simson said of the airline.
Norway, like the US, allows damages for economic loss or a reasonable royalty commensurate with what the individual could have commanded, Ørstavik said. Courts have considerable discretion and awards have been “rather low,” at least compared to the US, she said.
But she acknowledged there may not be precedent for a figure of Haaland’s stature. The 26-year-old Manchester City striker already is Norway’s record leading scorer and has been setting European records for his early-career production. And his global fame spiked after leading Norway to its first World Cup quarterfinal this year.
“I don’t know that there’s any other Norwegian that’s as famous,” Ørstavik said. “I don’t think there’s a comparable.”
Simson suggested Haaland could do something similar to Jordan — who reportedly donated his award to Chicago-area charities — as a reasonable path out of litigation where Haaland enforces his right and earns positive PR to boot.
“I think it’s a slam dunk for him,” Simson said. “The only question I have is: do they come up with a creative remedy where it is a win-win.”
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.

source