Marley jury hears closing arguments

Bob Marley's children don't want to see the reggae legend portrayed as a bobblehead or a plush toy, a lawyer representing the family said Thursday.

"They brought this case to protect the legacy of their father," Los Angeles attorney Jill Pietrini told a federal jury in Las Vegas.

The jury heard closing arguments Thursday in the civil case, which was filed three years ago by Marley's widow and children. The case stems from the sale of T-shirts and other products bearing the Jamaican singer's image in large retail stores across the United States.

In a trial that began Jan. 4, Marley's heirs have accused the defendants of engaging in unfair competition by selling unlicensed merchandise bearing Marley's identity and persona. They also claim the defendants have intentionally interfered with their business relationships and caused retailers to drop the Marley family's products in favor of the defendants' cheaper merchandise.

During her closing argument, Pietrini asked the jury to award her clients $375,000 for their claim of intentional interference. She previously said she intended to request $3 million for the family's unfair competition claim, but U.S. District Judge Philip Pro ruled that he will determine any damages if the jury sides with the family on that claim.

The case was filed in January 2008 by Fifty-Six Hope Road Music Ltd. and Zion Rootswear. Fifty-Six Hope Road was formed by Marley's widow, Rita, and nine of his 11 children. Marley died of cancer in 1981 at the age of 36.

According to court records in the Las Vegas case, the company first licensed Marley's identity in 1986. In 1999, it granted Zion the exclusive worldwide license to design, manufacture and sell T-shirts bearing Marley's image.

Rohan, one of Marley's sons, testified during the trial and sat at the plaintiffs' table during closing arguments.

Pietrini told jurors that Marley's children weren't given the rights to his identity.

"They had to borrow $11 million to get those rights back," the lawyer said.

The Las Vegas lawsuit was filed after Fifty-Six Hope Road learned that AVELA, a Nevada corporation, and its licensees were making and selling apparel featuring Marley's identity in various Target retail stores.

Rather than stop, according to the plaintiffs' trial brief, the defendants "increased their sale of Bob Marley clothing and expanded into other products," such as beach towels, bobbleheads and stickers.

Los Angeles attorney Byron Ball, who represents the defendants, said AVELA owner Leo Valencia did not use Marley's name on his products.

To succeed with their unfair competition claim, Ball argued, Marley's heirs must show that consumers likely were confused about the family's sponsorship of the defendants' products.

No one thinks about such issues when purchasing a T-shirt, the lawyer said as he held up a black T-shirt bearing an image of Marley's face.

"It's not a Rembrandt; it's a T-shirt," he said.

Jurors deliberated about an hour Thursday afternoon and are scheduled to resume their discussions this morning.