Hence why I included the bit about false endorsement, which
is a federal rule.
Notably, from your link:
> Therefore, a trademark is "not property in the ordinary sense," but only a word or symbol indicating the origin or source of a product.
> Although its registration is limited to the words "Babe Ruth," Pirone would have us read her rights in that word mark to include every photograph of Ruth ever taken. We decline to do so.
The product in question didn't use Babe Ruth's name in any way implying an endorsement or origination of the calendar; it merely included some pictures. The ruling determined that trademark does not apply here.
Pictures have been deemed eligible for copyright, but that's neither here nor there. The name "Jesus Christ" is not eligible for trademark.
