Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 839.1 (2026)

Right of privacy - Use of name or picture for

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

advertising without consent - Misdemeanor. Any person, firm or corporation that uses for the purpose of advertising for the sale of any goods, wares or merchandise, or for the solicitation of patronage by any business enterprise, the name, portrait or picture of any person, without having obtained, prior or subsequent to such use, the consent of such person, or, if such person is a minor, the consent of a parent or guardian, and, if such person is deceased, without the consent of the surviving spouse, personal representatives, or that of a majority of the deceased's adult heirs, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Laws 1965, c. 431, § 1, emerg. eff. July 9, 1965.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1969–2007 · leading case: LeFlore v. Reflections of Tulsa, Inc., 708 P.2d 1068 (Okla. 1985).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

LeFlore v. Reflections of Tulsa, Inc., 708 P.2d 1068 (Okla. 1985). · cites it 3× “This claim is under the authority of 21 O.S.1981 §§ 839.1 and 839.-2. She asks for $4,000 actual damages for embarrassment and emotional and mental suffering and $18,000 punitive damages.”

Showler v. Harper's Magazine Found., 222 F. App'x 755 (10th Cir. 2007). · cites it 4× “Turnley and Harper’s, alleging the following tort claims: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (Count 1); Invasion of Privacy (Count II); 2 Violation of Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 839.1 (Count III); Fraudulent/False Misrepresentation (Count IV); Constructive Fraud, Fraud and…”

McCormack v. Oklahoma Publ'g Co., 613 P.2d 737 (Okla. 1980). “In addition 21 O.S.1971 § 839.1 prohibits appropriation for one’s own benefit of another’s name or likeness and makes such appropriation a misdemean- or.”

Mrs. Alline E. Cordell v. Detective Publications, Inc., 419 F.2d 989 (6th Cir. 1969). “Okla.Stat.Ann. tit. 21, §§ 839.1, 839.2 (Supp.”

Cardtoons, L.C. v. Major League Baseball Players Ass'n, 182 F.3d 1132 (10th Cir. 1999). “MLBPA moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and filed counterclaims seeking declaratory judgment, injunctive relief, and damages under Oklahoma’s publicity rights statute, Okla. Stat. tit. 21 § 839.1 and 839.2 (1993).”

Cardtoons, L.C. v. Major League Baseball Players Ass'n, 838 F. Supp. 1501 (N.D. Okla. 1993). “MLBPA subsequently filed counterclaims and a request for declaratory judgment under 1) Okla.Stat. tit. 21 § 839.1; 2) Okla. tit.”

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.