dont forget the reason stephen p. new lost the g-raver case was because it was ruled that cornette wasn't relevant enough for the general public to recognize his image and/or likeness
>... even if G-Raver did engage in commercial speech subject to the Lanham Act, Cornette has not established a likelihood of success on his trademark claims because there is no likelihood of confusion between Cornette's merchandise and the Shirts, Cornette has not shown that his name is sufficiently famous as a [trade]mark to be protected from dilution... >Cornette has presented evidence that he has held a position of some prominence in the world of professional wrestling for nearly 40 years, but the full extent of that prominence and its consistency is not in the record.>Cornette has an internet following, with 1.7 million podcast downloads and 100,000 to 125,000 YouTube views each month, and 160,000 followers on Twitter. (Id. at 134:1–6.) However, he has presented no evidence of the reach of this following, its demographics, how widely recognized throughout the general American public he is, or how his following compares to other professional wrestlers, other wrestling personalities, celebrities generally, or the fame of other “highly distinctive” [trade]marks. it's actually a pretty fun read if you're interested in media law
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-wd-pen/2077881.html 