rss rss rss
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Submission Policy
  • Back Issue Archives
  • Volume XXII Editors and Staff
  • Alumni
Entertainment, Sports // Mar. 04, 2010 // by Defne Gunay // 5 Comments

Morals Clauses: Tiger Woods and The Death of His Sponsorships

September seemed like a good month for Tiger Woods. Forbes magazine declared that Woods was “the first billion-dollar athlete.”1 The magazine calculated that with the $10 million bonus he received from the FedEx Cup,2 Woods reached the billionaire status that is usually reserved for the Waltons and hedge fund CEOs. What made Woods’ impressive earnings even more remarkable was that his skills as a golf prodigy, gaining him trophies left and right, only made up 10% of his lifetime earnings.3 The rest came from his lucrative endorsement deals,4 most remarkably Nike which paid him $30 million annually.5

However, the first billion-dollar athlete saw his endorsement empire crash and burn in December, the aftermath of a scandalous car crash coupled with exposure of his (many) extramarital affairs. Accenture, the global consulting giant, and AT&T have already dropped Woods. Although not officially parting ways with Woods, Gilette has said it will start phasing out Woods from promotions for its Gillette razors and shaving foams.6 The reason? Following the flood of information regarding Wood’s infidelities,7 Woods no longer represents the athletic, clean-cut family-man such brands wish to be associated with.8 Or as in Accenture’s case, Woods “just wasn’t a metaphor for high performance anymore.”9

The relationship between Woods and his sponsors seems to have turned on his “immoral” or “bad behavior” and follows a whole string of celebrity deals gone bad in the recent years. Although the details of Woods’ contracts with the likes of Accenture are not known, it is presumed that the contracts were severed based up on a “morals clause” or “bad boy clause” given the size of Woods’ contracts and the prevalence of these clauses in celebrity endorsements.10 While a 1997 survey showed that less than half of the endorsement contracts had morals clauses in them, by 2003, seventy-five percent of the endorsement deals included these clauses.11

Morals clauses “enable one party to unilaterally terminate the agreement if the individual engages in conduct that could have some sort of negative impact upon the particular company or organization.”12 Thus, these clauses are used to “terminate a talent agreement when an actor’s conduct is detrimental to the buyer’s interests or otherwise devalues the performance due.”13 These clauses are especially frequent in sports and entertainment contracts because advertisers, endorsees, television networks and motion picture studios wish to “quickly eliminate the celebrity/product association in the mind of the consumer where the celebrity’s image has come into disrepute in the public’s view.”14 However, it is not always clear what constitutes an “immoral behavior” as envisioned by these clauses. Morals are usually defined by the society and the concepts that are prevailing in a particular period of time.15 Therefore, courts are usually required to interpret what parties intended to encompass within the concept of an “immoral behavior”.16

The history behind the morals clauses reveal their vagueness and how their meaning has become dependent on the society and the time period. The clauses were first used by Hollywood studios in early 1920s to protect themselves against erratic behavior of their contracted actors.17 The clauses became notorious during the McCarthyist era when they were used to terminate contracts of many writers, directors and producers who were accused of being having communist leanings by the House Committee on Un-American Activities.18 Thus, during this era morality clauses were used to attack political ideologies rather than actual immoral behavior.19

More recently, morals clauses have been used against likes of Michael Vick, Kobe Bryant and Kate Moss.20 These celebrities’ “immoral conduct” differed across the board. While Vick was indicted on federal charges relating to a series of alleged dog-fighting incidents,21 Bryant was charged with sexually assaulting a 19-year old22 and Moss was photographed using cocaine.23

What makes Woods’ situation unquestionably different than the aforementioned stars is that his extramarital affairs, however detestable or condemnable they may be, did not lead up to a criminal charge, or even a criminal investigation. He has issued a statement saying that he will take an “indefinite break” from golf, in order to focus on his personal life and to spend time with his family.24 Athletically, he is still on top of his game. Despite the breakout of the scandal, he was voted as the PGA player of the year, as well as the Athlete of the Decade by the Associated Press.25

So the question remains as to whether Woods will make a come-back to golf and his millions worth endorsement deals. History shows that it is possible. For example, in 2009, 5 years after charges against him were dropped, Bryant ranked as the 10th most powerful celebrity by Forbes magazine—having earned $45 million, $24 million of it from endorsement deals.26 Woods’ biggest endorser, Nike, has publicly backed Woods—saying that “Tiger just had a blip.”27 Therefore, it is not too far-fetched to assume that the world’s first billion-dollar athlete will be back and make a couple billion more—with morals clauses in tow.
__________________________________________________________________________
1 Kurt Badenhausen. Forbes.com, The First Billion Dollar Athlete. September 28, 2009, available at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25691350/
2 Id.
3 See Andrew Farrell and Tom Van Riper. Billionaire Status is Tiger Woods’ Next Trophy. MSNBC. July 15 2009. Available at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25691350/.
4 Id. It is reported that he has made $750 million from his endorsement deals alone. See also Erin Geiger Smith Will “Morals” Clauses Impact Tiger’s Endorsements? December 8 2009, The Business Insider available at: http://www.businessinsider.com/will-morals-clauses-impact-tigers-endorsements-2009-12
5 Badenhausen.
6 Matthew Lynn, Jan 4 1010, BusinessWeek, Tiger Woods’ Sponsors Should Forgive and Forget. Available at: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-01-04/tiger-woods-s-sponsors-should-forgive-and-forget-matthew-lynn.html
7 Larry Dorman, Woods Says He’ll Take ‘Indefinite Break’ from Golf, N.Y. Times, Dec. 11, 2009, available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/12/sports/golf/12woods.html
8 Lynn, supra n. 6.
9 Brian Stelter, Accenture, as if Tiger Woods Were Never There, N.Y. Times, Dec. 16, 2009 (quoting Accenture spokesperson Fred Hawrysh), available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/17/business/media/17accenture.html.
10 See Dave Carpenter and Emily Fredrix, ‘Bad Boy’ Clauses Can Sink Woods, Other Endorsers, MSN MONEY, Dec. 17, 2009, http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.aspx?Feed=AP&Date=20091217&ID=10899054&Symbol=US:NKE
11 Fernando Pinguelo. 2008 SETON HALL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW SPORTS & ENTERTAINMENT LAW SYMPOSIUM: FROM THE ARENA TO THE STREETS — THE PRESSURES PLACED ON ATHLETES, ENTERTAINERS, AND MANAGEMENT. 19 Seton Hall J. of Ent. And Sports Law 381, 485 (speech)
12 Id. at 482.
13 Noah B. Kressler, Using The Moral Clauses in Talent Agreements: A Historical, Legal and Practical Guide, 29 Columbia J. L. & Arts 235,
14 Fernando Pinguelo and Timothy D. Cedrone. Morals? Who Cares About Morals? An Examination of Morals Clauses in Talent Contracts and What Talent Needs to Know, 19 SETON HALL J. SPORTS & ENT. L. 347, 363 (2009).
15 Id. at 352.
16 Id.
17 Id. See also Pinguelo, supra n. 9, at 483.
18 Pinguelo and Cedrone, supra n. 12, at 355.
19 Id. at 356.
20 Id. at 357 (internal citations omitted).
21 Mark Maske, Falcons’ Vick Indicted in Dog Fighting Case, WASH. POST, Jul. 18, 2007, available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/17/AR2007071701393.html.
22 Alex Markels, Decision to Charge Bryant Due Today, N.Y. TIMES, Jul. 18, 2003, available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/18/sports/basketball-decision-to-charge-bryant-due-today.html?scp=264&sq=&st=nyt.
23 Guy Trebay and Eric Wilson. Kate Moss is Dismissed by H&M after Furor over Cocaine, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 21, 2005, available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/21/business/media/21moss.html.
24 Dorman, supra n. 7.
25 CNN.com, Tiger Woods Wins PGA Despite Personal Woes, Dec. 19, 2009, http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/12/19/tiger.woods.award/index.html.
26 Forbes.com, The Celebrity 100. June 3, 2009, http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/53/celebrity-09_Kobe-Bryant_OKPF.html
27 Lewis Dean, Nike Boss: ‘Tiger Just Had a Blip,’ SkyNews Online, Dec. 15, 2009, http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Tiger-Woods-Affairs-Nike-Boss-Phil-Knight-Says-Golfers-Revelations-Are-Just-A-Minor-Blip/Article/200912215500097?f=rss.

Written by: Defne Gunay

 

5 Responses

Brian
03.04.10

I am surprised that he is returning to golf so soon… seems odd to me.

Charles Wolfe
03.04.10

Is there a morals clause in the PGA? If so, why haven’t you kicked Tiger Woods out of the PGA?

Charles Wolfe
03.04.10

Please !!! Golf is a gentleman’s game. You’re killing all the golfers. You’re supporting a scum person. Why should we keep trying to be good golfers when the best golfer in the PGA is a major sumbag sexually.

Charles Wolfe
03.04.10

Please PGA. Wack up. Bobby Jones, Byron Nelson, all of the rest of great golfers. Why are we even caring about a scumbag just because he can play golf. It brings all of us DOWN

Tom
03.04.10

I find it amazing that 75% of endorsement contracts contained moral clauses in 2003! I am currently and have always been a huge fan of tiger woods and his play, so as you would expect I was flabbergasted when I heard that news in December. Either way however I feel Tiger is in line for a comeback and in the near future he will be back on top again!

Leave Your Response

The IPLJ Blog. Brought to you by:

Fordham University School of Law's Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal

Search by Tag

Archives

  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • August 2007
  • April 2007

Fordham University Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal BLOG

IPLJ Editor-In-Chief: Jacqueline P. McMahon

IPLJ Managing Editor: Emily Chepiga

IPLJ Technology & Blog Editor: Amy Dunayevich

................................................. Special thanks to Patricia Chang, 2L staffer, for site maintenance and graphic design.

Blogroll

172685

Congress Wants to Stop Your Smartphone From Knowing Too Much About You

Feb. 03, 2012 // 0 Comments

Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) has drafted legislation,...

1010309-drake-portrait-617-409

Drake sued by Ex for Royalties

Feb. 03, 2012 // 0 Comments

Whoops – looks like someone really could...

bikram

That’s so not zen: Yogis suing Yogis

Feb. 03, 2012 // 0 Comments

This blog’s tech editor started doing yoga...

HIPPA

On the heels of U.S. v. Jones

Feb. 02, 2012 // 0 Comments

CNet suggests that Congress should be following...

CIVET CAT COFFEE

Vietnam’s Counterfeit Civet Coffee

Feb. 01, 2012 // 0 Comments

“here is a growing market in fake...

ipad-art-wide-samsung-20apple-420x0

Samsung: Imitator or Innovator?

Feb. 01, 2012 // 0 Comments

The Samsung Tablet war rages on in...

123Blocks

Links as easy as…

Jan. 30, 2012 // 0 Comments

1. Investors watch Pfizer and Merck as...

Twitter-Censorship

#Censorship?

Jan. 29, 2012 // 0 Comments

This week, Twitter announced that it would...

Journal Updates

Picture 212

Staffer Takes Second in NYSBA Writing Competition!

Jan. 29, 2012 // 0 Comments

IPLJ is proud to report that staffer...

supremecourtimage

Supreme Court cites IPLJ!

Jan. 19, 2012 // 0 Comments

We are so proud to report that...

number-1-sign

Book 1 is ready!

Jan. 08, 2012 // 0 Comments

In honor of the first Volume XXII...

10286-fordham_univ_law_-C

You’re Invited! Premiere IPLJ Event: IP Bullying or Proactive Enforcement?

Oct. 31, 2011 // 0 Comments

Be sure to save the date 11/11/11...

book-publishing-definitions

IPLJ’s Business Editor Published!

Oct. 25, 2011 // 1 Comments

IPLJ’s Business Editor, Amit R. Parikh, co-authored...

iplj-logo

IPLJ Alumna Writes on Fashion Law

Oct. 25, 2011 // 0 Comments

We here at IPLJ are proud to...

1038_old-skate-patent

A New Look

Sep. 14, 2011 // 2 Comments

Notice anything different around here? With the...

linkedin

IPLJ is now on LinkedIn!

Aug. 29, 2011 // 0 Comments

Join the IPLJ group on LinkedIn, students,...

Categories

  • Apple
  • Art
  • Blogroll
  • Books
  • Broadway
  • Celebrity
  • Cell Phones
  • Censorship
  • Communications Law
  • Computers
  • Congress
  • Copyright
  • Counterfeit
  • Design
  • DMCA
  • Entertainment
  • Fashion
  • First Amendment
  • Fourth Amendment
  • FSLF
  • General
  • Google
  • International IP Law
  • Internet
  • Journal Updates
  • Major League Baseball
  • Microsoft
  • Movies
  • Music
  • National Football League
  • NBA
  • NCAA
  • New York
  • News
  • Patents
  • Piracy
  • Plagiarism
  • Privacy
  • Royalties
  • Social Media
  • Sports
  • Surveillance
  • Technology
  • Television
  • Trademark
  • United States Supreme Court
  • Video Games

Recent Posts

  • Congress Wants to Stop Your Smartphone From Knowing Too Much About You
  • Drake sued by Ex for Royalties
  • What’s All This About Pirates on the Internet?
  • That’s so not zen: Yogis suing Yogis
  • On the heels of U.S. v. Jones

Admin

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

The IPLJ

The Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal is one of the leading scholarly law journals dedicated to the publication of Articles, Essays, Comments, Addresses, and Notes on intellectual property, media, and entertainment law.

The Blog is the Journal's online counterpart. This Blog strives to present the most up-to-date intellectual property, media, sports, art, and entertainment law news and issues... and then some. We at the IPLJ find this ever-changing field fascinating and relevant. We hope you find this Blog to be the same.

  • © Copyright IPLJ / All Rights Reserved.
  • Premium WordPress Themes / Theme by wpStyles.org