Elvis Presley International Memorial Foundation v. Elvis Presley Memorial Foundation 733 S.W.2d 89 (1987) EPIMF and EPMF were both nonprofit corporations dedicated to selling Elvis paraphernalia. EPMF sued EPIMF for unfair competition, to prevent it from using the name "Elvis Presley." Elvis Presley's estate argued that they had given the right for EPMF to use the name and had not given the right to EPIMF. EPIMF argued that Elvis Presley's image entered the public domain after his death, so they didn't need anyone's permission to use it. EPMF argued that Elvis Presley's name and image are descendible. Descendible means that the property (here the right to use his likeness) is inherited by his heirs after death. The right to control one's likeness is called a right of publicity. The Trial Court found for EPMF. EPIMF appealed. The Appellate Court affirmed. The Appellate Court found that, under Tennessee law, a person's right of publicity is descendible property. The Court recognized that a celebrity's right to publicity can be possessed, used, subject to a contract, sold, or assigned. It is unquestionably an intangible personal property with economic value. The Court suggested many reasons for why the right to publicity is descendible: If it's a property right in life it must be a property right in death. Otherwise it would allow "one man to reap what another has sown." A celebrity operates with the expectation that he is leaving a valuable asset for his heirs. The value of contacts to use a celebrity's likeness would lose value if their likeness entered the public domain upon death. It prevents manufacturers from deceptively claiming a dead celebrity endorsed their product. The concept of the right of publicity is a relatively recent offshoot of the right to privacy. See Zacchini v. Scripts-Howard Broadcasting Co. (433 U.S. 562 (1977)).