Photo, a free-lance photographer, took a picture of Player i…
Photo, a free-lance photographer, took a picture of Player in front of Shoe Store. Player was a nationally known amateur basketball star who had received much publicity in the press. At the time, the window display in Shoe Sore featured “Jumpers”, a well known make of basketball shoes. Photo sold the picture, greatly enlarged, to Shoe Store and told Shoe Store that Photo had Player’s consent to do so and that Player had also consented to Shoe Store’s showing the enlarged photograph in their window. Shoe Store made no effort to contact Player to ascertain whether indeed Photo had Player’s consent as represented. In fact, Player did not even know that Photo had taken the photograph. Shoe Store put the enlargement in their window with the display of “Jumpers” shoes. The college that Player attended believed that Player had intentionally endorsed Shoe Store and Jumpers shoes and the college thus cancelled Player’s athletic scholarship. If Player asserts a cause of action based upon defamation against Shoe Store, will Player prevail?