Intellectual Property Challenges of Celebrity Holograms
Intellectual Property Challenges of Celebrity Holograms
Written by Savannah Yamat
In the days following the 2018 Super Bowl, news media outlets were abuzz not just about football but about Justin Timberlake’s halftime performance. Public discussions shifted away from the production quality, setlist, or skill of Justin Timberlake’s performance—instead, it centered around one topic: the post-mortem appearance of Prince via a large-scale projection.[1] Although the gesture was meant to be a tribute and a token of respect, it drew heavy public criticism due to the fact that Prince was a very vocal opponent against “singing from the grave.” In an interview with Guitar World, when questioned about virtual reality and holograms, he was quoted as saying:
“Everything is as it is, and it should be. If I was meant to jam with Duke Ellington, we would have lived in the same age. . . . that’ll never happen to me. To prevent that kind of thing from happening is another reason why I want artistic control.”[2]
Prince’s rejection of posthumous digital resurrection illustrates the ethical dilemma posed by celebrity holograms: while this technology has great entertainment value, posthumous performances risk undermining an artist’s autonomy and creative intent. Beyond ethics, holograms raise legal questions, particularly in the area of trademark law. This post explores the intersection of celebrity holograms and trademark law, examining the complex issues surrounding personal image rights and commercial applications.
- The Emergence of Celebrity Holograms and Commercial Applications
Holography, the technique of creating a three-dimensional image through the use of lights and lasers, was invented in 1948 by Hungarian-British physicist Dennis Gabor.[3] It was an unexpected discovery made during his research aimed at the image resolution of electron microscopes.[4] But the use of holograms has expanded way beyond the electron microscope. Advances in computer power, technology, and digital imaging have allowed holograms to move from scientific use into mainstream cultural and commercial spaces.
The entertainment industry has been the most usable visible user of hologram technology, especially in live performances. One of the first hologram concerts was of Tupac Shakur at the 2012 Coachella festival.[5] Following Tupac’s virtual performance at Coachella, several estates and entertainment companies pursued similar projects. In 2019, the company BASE Hologram launched the “Rock ‘N’ Roll Dream Tour,” featuring performances from holograms of Roy Orbison and Buddy Holly.[6] And in 2020, the estate of Whitney E. Houston announced “An Evening with Whitney: The Whitney Houston Hologram tour,” a posthumous concert tour featuring a hologram of Whitney Houston.[7] The tour featured 54 shows spanning across Europe and North America.[8]
Apart from posthumous tributes, living artists have utilized hologram technology to bolster their current performances. From May 27, 2022, to May 4, 2026, the Swedish pop group ABBA has staged “ABBA Voyage,” a concert residency featuring virtual avatars of the band members as they appeared in 1979.[9] The virtual avatars perform alongside a live band.[10]
The success of these tours have shown that audiences are willing to accept, and even embrace, the digital resurrection of iconic artists. One of the biggest benefits of the use of celebrity holograms is granting fans the opportunity to experience performances by artists they may never have been able to see in person. Pat Houston, the executor of Whitney Houston’s estate, stated that the main reason for the hologram tour was to protect Whitney’s legacy and to keep it alive.[11] Post-mortem celebrity holograms allow an artist’s music to last beyond their lifetime and to preserve the cultural and artistic legacy of a musician. This technology has the ability to preserve musical culture and to bridge the gap of generational divides.
Additionally, holograms have great potential as revenue-generating assets. For example: estates can monetarily benefit from licensing performances, advertisers can use digital likenesses in marketing products, and film studios can use holograms to maintain continuity in film productions. Although there are many benefits stemming from use (especially commercial use) of holograms, from a legal standpoint, there are many issues that need to be addressed, particularly regarding the rights to an artist’s image, likeness, and music after death.
2. Legal Framework
Trademark law protects individuals from the unauthorized use of their persona, which includes their name, image, or likeness.[12] Trademark law plays a significant role in determining who may legally reproduce a celebrity’s identity, and who can commercially benefit from it. Holographs feature an artist’s name, image, and likeness, so usage of them assumedly should be regulated by trademark law. However, the application of trademark law is not entirely straightforward, especially when balancing the rights of deceased individuals with commercial interests and artistic expression.
-
- Trademark Law — TMEP § 1202.14
Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (TMEP) § 1202.14 addresses the registrability of holograms as trademarks.[13] It provides that: [a] hologram . . . does not function as a mark in the absence of evidence that consumers would perceive it as a trademark.”[14] This distinction is made since holograms have utility in non-trademark purposes, such as security, education, and defense against fraud and tampering.[15] TMEP § 1202.14 is supported by In re Upper Deck Co., 59 USPQ2d 1688, (TTAB 2001), a case in which the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board found that a hologram found used on trading cards did not function as a mark, as other companies used holograms on trading cards as anti-counterfeiting devices.[16] However, unlike holograms used as anti-counterfeiting or security devices, celebrity holograms are deliberately intended to promote brand recognition and identity associated with an artist. A celebrity hologram does not have a functional purpose outside of consumer reception to the performance.
In addition, TMEP § 1202.14 provides that: “if a hologram has two or more views, the examining attorney should also refuse registration under §§ 1 and 45 of the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 11051 and 1127, on the ground that the application seeks registration of more than one mark.” [17]
Because a holographic concert performance involves a sequence of continuous movement, a USPTO examining attorney would likely refuse registration of a celebrity hologram under this clause.
Although TMEP § 1202.14 is meant to directly regulate the use of holograms, there are significant gaps that prevent the provision from applying to celebrity holograms. It highlights the complexities involved in the usage of holographic likeness of a celebrity. If a celebrity or their estate seeks trademark registration to prevent unauthorized commercial exploitation of their image, they may have difficulty with doing so. As hologram technology continues to evolve and the demand for it grows, these trademark law issues are likely to grow in significance, as artists seek to control the commercial use of their likeness.
B. The Right to Publicity
The right to publicity is an intellectual property right that prevents the misappropriation of a person’s name, likeness, or other marker of personal identity.[18] It is rooted in the belief that an individual should have the right to control the commercial use of their identity.[19] The right to publicity has great relevance to the subject matter of this post, as usage of celebrity holograms has the possibility to impinge on a deceased celebrity’s right to control the commercial usage of their identity.
The requirements set by TMEP § 1202.14 can be quite hard to meet for a celebrity or for their estate. The right to publicity has the potential to cure some of the gaps left by trademark law and allows artists and their estates to challenge unauthorized uses that do not meet the threshold for trademark protection under TMEP § 1202.14. The right to publicity gives a level of control to the estates of deceased celebrities. If an artist’s image, likeness, or identity is used without the consent of the estate, the right to publicity provides the estate with the right to take legal action for unauthorized use.
Despite its protections, the right to publicity has limitations. There is no federally recognized right to publicity, and the doctrine is mainly supported by state law.[20] The enforceability of the right to publicity can vary from state to state. If hologram performances are used internationally or across state lines, this can create conflicts. Additionally, the right to publicity does not resolve some legal and ethical issues, including the question of consent for posthumous performances (e.g., how would the rights of an artist without a clear executor be protected?) nor does it address what appropriate compensation looks like for an artist’s estate.
Although the right to publicity provides solutions to some of the challenges posed by TMEP § 1202.14, it has its own limitations. Both trademark law and publicity rights must continue to work to ensure that hologram performances are legally protected and ethically managed.
Conclusion
Celebrity holograms are an important tool with great entertainment and commercial value. However, this technology challenges the existing frameworks of intellectual property law and ethics. TMEP § 1202.14 and the right to publicity offer valuable guidance for ensuring the post-mortem use of a celebrity’s likeness in a performance is legally protected. But as technology advances, it is crucial that IP law evolves alongside it, adapting to new forms of digital representation and ensuring that the rights of both living and deceased artists are safeguarded. A modern, comprehensive legal approach is necessary to address the complex issues that will arise as holograms continue to be used in the entertainment industry.
[1] CBS Philadelphia, Justin Timberlake Uses Prince Projection After Saying He Wouldn’t Use
Hologram of Legendary Artist, CBS News (February 4, 2018),
https://www.cbsnews.com/philadelphia/news/justin-timberlake-prince-super-bowl-2018/
[2] Sydney Gore, Prince hated holograms before they were even invented, The Fader (February
3, 2018), https://www.thefader.com/2018/02/03/prince-hated-holograms
[3] The Nobel Foundation, Dennis Gabor — Biographical, The Nobel Prize (1971),
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1971/gabor/biographical/
[4] Id.
[5] SnoopDoggTV, Tupac Hologram Snoop Dogg and Dr. Dre Perform Coachella Live 2012,
YOUTUBE (April 17, 2012), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGbrFmPBV0Y
[6] Ana Monroy Yglesias, Roy Orbison & Buddy Holly Tour Dates Are Here, Recording
Academy (June 18, 2019),
https://www.grammy.com/news/roy-orbison-buddy-holly-hologram-tour-dates-are-here
[7] The Whitney Houston Official Website, An Evening with Whitney: The Whitney Houston
Hologram Tour (last visited December 10, 2025),
https://www.whitneyhouston.com/tour/an-evening-with-whitney-the-whitney-houston-hologra
[8] Id.
[9] Abba Voyage, https://abbavoyage.com/ (last visited December 10, 2025).
[10] Id.
[11] Ben Sisaro, Whitney Houston’s Estate Plans a Hologram Tour and a New Album, New York
Times (May 20, 2019),
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/20/business/media/whitney-houston-hologram-album.html
[12] Daniel A. Rozansky, Heather A. Antoine, & Jeremy Beutler,, Protecting Image and
Likeness through Trademark Law, The National Law Review (October 19, 2021),
https://natlawreview.com/article/protecting-image-and-likeness-through-trademark-law
[13] Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure § 1202.14 (January 2024),
https://www.bitlaw.com/source/tmep/1202_14.html
[14] Id.
[15] Ajay Behl, How are Holograms Being Applied to Our Daily Lives, Cogent (February 13,
2024), https://cogentibs.com/how-are-holograms-being-applied-to-our-daily-lives/
[16] Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure § 1202.14 (January 2024),
https://www.bitlaw.com/source/tmep/1202_14.html
[17] Id.
[18] International Trademark Association, Right of Publicity,
https://www.inta.org/topics/right-of-publicity/ (last visited December 13, 2025).
[19] Kevin L. Vick and Jean-Paul Jassy, Why a Federal Right of Publicity Statute is Necessary,
American Bar Association (August 2011),
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/communications_lawyer/august2
011/why_federal_right_publicity_statute_is_necessary_comm_law_28_2.authcheckdam.pdf
[20] Id.