{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026785714285714284, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004464285714285714, 'mean_word_length': 5.1020408163265305, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Timbre and Legal Likeness

In 1988, singer-songwriter Tom Waits sued Frito-Lay for using an impersonation of his voice in a Doritos commercial, an act that flagrantly contradicted his anticommercial persona as an artist. The company had appropriated not just his voice but his artistic identity, and the court ruled in favor of Waits. Drawing on recent brand theory, this chapter claims that in spite of the flexibility of Waits’s vocal timbre, his distinctive, gravelly voice—possibly a voluntary affectation, the result of laryngeal damage, or a combination of both—is universally identifiable and associated with his brand persona as a musician. This is evidenced by numerous interviews, fan forums, and musical analysis of recorded works. The Waits v. Frito-Lay, Inc. case set a precedent for the legal protection of distinctive vocal timbres against unauthorized use for commercial purposes.