利用個人形象特徵作為商業上利用，已在社會交易上行之有年。在美國法制度下，作為人格權替代品之隱私權，雖曾被嘗試用來保護此種商業利用，然美國法院持續性地拒絕，並因此引發了個人公開權之興起。我國法並無個人公開權，且從法院判決觀之，我國法院以人格權為保護手段。對照美國隱私權和我國人格權有相同功用乙節，何以有同樣功能之手段卻有不同結論，似有討論必要。本文藉由比對臺美相關判決，整理出美國法院拒絕以隱私權保護理由，並說明何以我國法下之人格權，得以克服美國法院所面臨之困難點。

Applying personal character image for commercial purpose has a long lasting history in daily commerce. As the mirror image of right of personality under U.S. legal system, right of privacy has been called on in cases of such commercial exploitation. U.S. court, however, persistently denied such claim and therefore induced the development of right of publicity. With lack of such right, Taiwanese court applied right of personality as the legal remedy. Comparing the similarity in function between right of personality and right of privacy, the reason why two rights with similar purposes could reach different conclusions is of great interest. By comparing the verdicts delivered by Taiwanese and U.S. courts, this article sorts out the reasons why U.S. courts denied right of privacy and explain how the right of personality under Taiwan legal system can bypass such difficulties.