identity theft of traditional artisans

Question

As a legally-constituted craftswomens cooperative in Mexico, do we have a legal right to complain about the use of the images of our own persons and of our family members to promote the sale of products from which we receive no benefit?

We were the principal supplier of jewelry (50K/year) to a customer who refused to raise the price 7 years (January 2000-December 2017).

That business was sold in 2018 to a lady who used to be the stock girl; she claims no knowledge of any accounting before her tenure. We want to "close the books", since we dont have the complete record; only the customer kept track of the differences so as to round everything off in their favor. Our cooperative is comprised of rural craftswomen; we have most unpleasantly been proved to be too innocent for these times.

What makes this different, is that these people assure their customers that they are doing a good deed for traditional third-world artisans. Otherwise, probably, they would not purchase.

Can these people somehow be legally held to the principles they espouse to their customers?

Answer 1

I have only passing knowledge of the laws of Mexico. Any legal action should be discussed with a legally licensed Mexican lawyer.

As a legally-constituted craftswomen's cooperative in Mexico, do we have a legal right to complain about the use of the images of our own persons and of our family members to promote the sale of products from which we receive no benefit?

As asked, it appears so. Mexico has a "right to publicity", including the right to allow or deny the use of one's image(https://en.uhthoff.com.mx/articles/publicity-and-image-rights-in-mexico/). However,

We were the principal supplier of jewelry (50K/year) to a customer who refused to raise the price 7 years (January 2000-December 2017).

This suggests the possibility of a contract. The contract can contain multiple terms, including potentially the granting of the right to use imagery that the cooperative holds(which they possibly might hold on behalf of their members). Additionally/alternatively, the permissions to use such images may have been obtained from the subjects by the photographers directly.

If not a term of the contract, such permission may possibly be revoked (though receiving payment can potentially complicate this); if part of the contract, it may still be revoked, but doing so may necessitate the termination of the contract.

Side note: Generally speaking, unless mandated by law (unlikely, especially since they are not an employer) or contract terms, the buyer is not required to raise prices. The seller may be able to refuse to sell at the old prices (unless required to do so by contract terms).

That business was sold in 2018 to a lady who used to be the stock girl; she claims no knowledge of any accounting before her tenure. We want to "close the books", since we dont have the complete record; only the customer kept track of the differences so as to round everything off in their favor.

The buyer's records should be irrelevant to your accounting*. The buyer could sell the jewelry, give it away, or destroy it, and this should be irrelevant to In general, the cooperative gives the buyer jewelry and receives either money or debt in return. In either case, normally one receives a record recording of the receipt jewelry from the buyer (e.g. "On DD/MM/YYYY, received 5 bracelets" or whatever)**.

*Unless the "buyer" is not actually buying the jewelry, but rather selling it on consignment, which is a completely different relationship and scenario.

**Thus, even in the case of debt, this should not matter, as the cooperative should have its own, independent, records of its delivered property, funds, debts and invoices pending, for tax purposes if nothing else.

What makes this different, is that these people assure their customers that they are doing a good deed for traditional third-world artisans. Otherwise, probably, they would not purchase. Can these people somehow be legally held to the principles they espouse to their customers?

Generally, this would be dependent on the laws of where the borrower sells to their own customers. Usually, one is only held to account to act in accordance with laws and obligations(such as those established by contract); however, there are frequently "false advertising laws" prohibiting lies in advertising products. However, depending on the advertising, this may not be false. "We buy directly form a co-operative of Mexican craftswomen" would be true, for example.

Answer 2

This answer deals only with the right of publicity, not with any other issues raised in the question.

In addition to the right under the law of Mexico, the US sate of Ohio has a law protected the right of publicity it is at Chapter 2741 of the Ohio Revised Code (ORC) comprising sections 2741.01 thru 2741.99. Particularly significant are 2741.02, 2741.06, and 2741.07.

This law prohibits use of an individual's "persona" for "commercial purposes" without written permission. It defiens "persona" as:

an individual's name, voice, signature, photograph, image, likeness, or distinctive appearance, if any of these aspects have commercial value.

Under 2741.07 (a) (1) a pron who wins such a suit is entitled to:

(a) Actual damages, including any profits derived from and attributable to the unauthorized use of an individual's persona for a commercial purpose as determined under division (A)(2) of this section;

(b) At the election of the plaintiff and in lieu of actual damages, statutory damages in the amount of at least two thousand five hundred dollars and not more than ten thousand dollars, as determined in the discretion of the trier of fact, taking into account the willfulness of the violation, the harm to the persona in question, and the ability of the defendant to pay a civil damage award;

(c) If applicable pursuant to section 2315.21 of the Revised Code, punitive or exemplary damages.

Under 2741.07 (a) (2):

(2) The trier of fact shall include any profits derived from and attributable to the unauthorized use of an individual's persona for a commercial purpose in calculating the award of actual damages under division (A)(1)(a) of this section.

See also Portman's Roadmap to the Right of Publicity -- Ohio where it is stated:

The statutory right’s definition of persona limits its definition of actionable uses to those of characteristics of one’s persona that have “commercial value.” A state appellate court interpreting a common law misappropriation claim concluded, however, that the fact that the use of the person’s identity had commercial value to the defendant was sufficient at common law to state claim, even if the underlying person’s name or likeness did not otherwise have commercial value. The addition of a specified cause of action on behalf of members of the armed forces and National Guard supports such an interpretation of commercial value. A 2017 (unpublished) decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals suggests a different interpretation of the Ohio statute, one that requires a plaintiff to have an independently commercially valuable persona.

It might be easier to enforce and collect a damage award in an Ohio court on an Ohio defendant, than to enforce the judgement of a Mexican court. An Ohio lawyer would be very useful if one brings such a suit. I cannot judge the relative benefits of the law of Mexico and of Ohio