ILCS » Chapter 765 · Act 1075
Illinois Compiled Statutes

765 ILCS 1075/30 (2026)

Limitations regarding use of an individual's identity

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(765 ILCS 1075/30)
    Sec. 30. Limitations regarding use of an individual's identity.
    (a) A person may not use an individual's identity for commercial purposes during the individual's lifetime without having obtained previous written consent from the appropriate person or persons specified in Section 20 of this Act or their authorized representative.
    (b) A person may not knowingly distribute, transmit, or make available to the general public a sound recording or audiovisual work with actual knowledge that the work contains an unauthorized digital replica.
    (c) If an individual's death occurs after the effective date of this Act, a person may not use that individual's identity or digital replica in violation of this Act for 50 years after the date of the individual's death without having obtained previous written consent from the appropriate person or persons specified in Section 20 of this Act.
    (d) Any person who materially contributes to, induces, or otherwise facilitates a violation of subsection (b) by another person after having obtained actual knowledge that the other person is infringing upon an individual's rights under this Section may be found liable for the violation.
    (e) Subsection (d) does not apply to a person that solely transmits, stores, or provides access to data or software, including interactive entertainment software, application software providers, or cloud service providers with respect to any unauthorized digital replica stored or transmitted at the direction of a user of material that resides on a system or network, if the person:
        (1) does not have actual knowledge that the material
    
or an activity using the material on the system or network is unauthorized;
        (2) in the absence of such actual knowledge, does not
    
willfully disregard facts or circumstances that would create actual knowledge; or
        (3) upon obtaining actual knowledge, facts or
    
circumstances that would create actual knowledge, or written notification of claimed unauthorized activity, acts expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material that is the subject of infringing activity; if the person does not personally have the ability to remove or disable access to the material, the person acts expeditiously to notify the person that has the ability to remove or disable access to the material. As used in this subsection, "expeditiously" has the same meaning as it does in 17 U.S.C. 512.
    (f) Subject to the limitations in subsection (e), all of the elements of 17 U.S.C. 512 shall be incorporated mutatis mutandis with respect to claims relating to unauthorized digital replicas. This exemption shall apply without regard to whether the unauthorized version infringes copyright.
    (g) Nothing in this Act may be construed in a manner inconsistent with 47 U.S.C. 230 or any other federal law.
(Source: P.A. 103-836, eff. 1-1-25.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 41 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 2002–2026 · leading case: Blair v. Nevada Landing P'ship, RBG, LP, 859 N.E.2d 1188 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Blair v. Nevada Landing P'ship, RBG, LP, 859 N.E.2d 1188 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 2× “765 ILCS 1075/30 (West 2002). Section 30 of the Right of Publicity Act provides, “A person may not use an individual’s identity for commercial purposes during the individual’s lifetime without having obtained previous written consent from the appropriate person or persons.”
Christine Dancel v. Groupon, Inc., 949 F.3d 999 (7th Cir. 2019). “” 765 ILCS 1075/30(a). A plaintiff must thus prove (1) the appropriation of one’s identity, (2) without one’s con- sent, (3) for another’s commercial benefit.”
Flentye v. Kathrein, 485 F. Supp. 2d 903 (N.D. Ill. 2007). “” 765 ILCS 1075/30(a). “Commercial purposes” is defined as “the public use or holding out of an individual’s identity (i) on or in connection with the offering for sale or sale of a product, merchandise, goods, or services; (ii) for purposes of advertising or promoting products,…”
Johannes Martin v. Living Essentials, LLC, 653 F. App'x 482 (7th Cir. 2016). “As the district court recognized, Martin’s complaint does not state a claim under the IRPA,-That law prohibits the nonconsensual exploitation of an individual’s “identity” for commercial purposes, 765 ILCS 1075/30, and broadly defines “identity” to mean “any attribute .”
Schivarelli v. CBS, INC., 776 N.E.2d 693 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). “" 765 ILCS 1075/30(a) (West 1998). However, section 35 provides, "This Act does not apply to * * * use of an individual's identity for noncommercial purposes, including any news, public affairs, or sports broadcast or account, or any political campaign; * * * [or] promotional…”
Berry v. Chade Fashions, Inc., 890 N.E.2d 1239 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). · cites it 2× “(Chade Fashions), for breach of contract and violation of the Illinois Right of Publicity Act (765 ILCS 1075/30 (West 2000)) (the Act). The trial court entered a partied summary judgment for the plaintiff as to liability under the Act.”
Jordan v. Jewel Food Stores, Inc., 83 F. Supp. 3d 761 (N.D. Ill. 2015). · cites it 2× “Jordan’s Summary Judgment Motion Jordan has moved for summary-judgment on liability as to his IRPA claim.”
Metlife Investors USA Ins. v. Zeidman, 734 F. Supp. 2d 304 (E.D.N.Y 2010). “765 ILCS 1075/30(a) (emphasis added). “Commercial purposes” is defined in pertinent part by the statute as “the public use or holding out of an individual’s identity .”
Berry v. Ford Models, Inc., 525 F. App'x 451 (7th Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “It followed, Berry continued, that Ford was required to obtain her written consent before any photographs from that shoot could be used by Chade Fashions for product packaging.”
Maremont v. Susan Fredman Design Grp., Ltd., 772 F. Supp. 2d 967 (N.D. Ill. 2011). “Specifically, 765 ILCS 1075/30(a) states in relevant part: “A person may not use an individual’s identity for commercial purposes during the individual’s lifetime without having obtained previous written consent from the appropriate person or persons.”
Rivera v. Google, Inc., 366 F. Supp. 3d 998 (E.D. Ill. 2018). “Applying a template to a face on a voluntarily uploaded photograph is very different from collecting the tiny physical remnants left by ridges on a person's fingers.”
Schivarelli v. CBS, Inc., 333 Ill. App. 3d 755 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). “” 765 ILCS 1075/30(a) (West 1998). However, section 35 provides, “This Act does not apply to *** use of an individual’s identity for noncommercial purposes, including any news, public affairs, or sports broadcast or account, or any political campaign; *** [or] promotional…”
Show all 41 citing cases →
— 765 ILCS 1075/30(a) — 30 cases
Christine Dancel v. Groupon, Inc., 949 F.3d 999 (7th Cir. 2019). “” 765 ILCS 1075/30(a). A plaintiff must thus prove (1) the appropriation of one’s identity, (2) without one’s con- sent, (3) for another’s commercial benefit.”
Flentye v. Kathrein, 485 F. Supp. 2d 903 (N.D. Ill. 2007). “” 765 ILCS 1075/30(a). “Commercial purposes” is defined as “the public use or holding out of an individual’s identity (i) on or in connection with the offering for sale or sale of a product, merchandise, goods, or services; (ii) for purposes of advertising or promoting products,…”
Schivarelli v. CBS, INC., 776 N.E.2d 693 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). “" 765 ILCS 1075/30(a) (West 1998). However, section 35 provides, "This Act does not apply to * * * use of an individual's identity for noncommercial purposes, including any news, public affairs, or sports broadcast or account, or any political campaign; * * * [or] promotional…”
Jordan v. Jewel Food Stores, Inc., 83 F. Supp. 3d 761 (N.D. Ill. 2015). “Jordan’s Summary Judgment Motion Jordan has moved for summary-judgment on liability as to his IRPA claim.”
Metlife Investors USA Ins. v. Zeidman, 734 F. Supp. 2d 304 (E.D.N.Y 2010). “765 ILCS 1075/30(a) (emphasis added). “Commercial purposes” is defined in pertinent part by the statute as “the public use or holding out of an individual’s identity .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.